Mary Portas take on dying High St's

fc123

avantra wrote: »

The recession in the retail sector is nature's way of clearing the weak and unadapted am afraid, real shame but we need to move on and adapt (Sorry I'm stating the obvious).

It has also got rid of some interesting/niche stores too.

We adapted, moved onward and upward then let it go...best thing we have ever done....wish we had done it 12 months earlier now..but hindsight and all that.

We would have been happy to carry it on but with another rent increase (no less than 40% after surveyors valuations) it was pointless.

Each day I am have this feeling of thank heaven we got out.

wageslave

Even the ultra hip Mary Portas seemed out dated on this programme.
We are seeing evolution at work in the retail sector and all she could do was pass out the fiddles round the bonfire.

fc123

wageslave wrote: »

Even the ultra hip Mary Portas seemed out dated on this programme.
We are seeing evolution at work in the retail sector and all she could do was pass out the fiddles round the bonfire.

I was quite a fan...and I have attended a talk she gave at a trade fair which was much more chewy than her telly chat...............she spoke a lot about retail theatre, more selling online but rents issue came up in questions plus the far smaller margins that indies achieve (so not leaving enough to pay a similar rent to a chainstore ...who then set the higher rent values for the area) and she couldn't really respond.

I know personally one store she made over. They are on record (on a telly appearance post show) as saying the makeover didn't increase T/O at all but once the show aired, they then became a tourist destination and sales soared.
It was continous..I was opposite end of town and we got vistor enquiries all the time.

Unfortunately, the follow up visit wasn't kind and they felt truly shafted.


I have a feeling that the show on Tewkesbury won't have the same effect. It didn't want to make me visit the area at all.

She associates/employs top people in her field and seems very successful but I agree with you, her advice seemed a bit dated to me too.

wageslave

fc123 wrote: »

It has also got rid of some interesting/niche stores too.

We adapted, moved onward and upward then let it go...best thing we have ever done....wish we had done it 12 months earlier now..but hindsight and all that.

We would have been happy to carry it on but with another rent increase (no less than 40% after surveyors valuations) it was pointless.

Each day I am have this feeling of thank heaven we got out.

Dont you think the internet is the logical selling place for niche markets?

dopester

fc123 wrote: »

I read an article in MWB recently (not published online) about this guy
http://www.baggamenswear.co.uk/UNQ_HomePage.aspx

I remember his first store from 15 odd years back.
He has just removed loads of trad rail space and stock ......installed PC's so customer can view online but instore, has some stock displayed, masses of service available to any customer and they serve from stockroom instead.
Stockroom space was massively increased so he runs everything from one site now.
Smart guy.

A bit like an Argos, but for clothes? Sounds like it could be a good way to go about it... and quite a bit of markup on their range... but how many stores does he have? That middle-market range... whilst it could be ticking-over nicely for the moment... I'm not convinced in the longer-term.

I'm not sure what the transition actually is. Doubt it is pure-internet shopping alone. Lower margins and you're competing with so many other low-margin retailers.. some like Argos - and ebay.

If it were your business... do you want to target those with less money.. hunting for bargains with the cash they do have - or try and go for the top-end where you can charge a premium?

People like a bit of pampering, luxury.. style... and margins there, provided you can find innovative ways to attract the high-end custom/desire. Last week I had an argument with a close family member (still hurting about it, because I thought I'd tamed them) about some designer-brand £300 fashion purchase they plan to make (which must only cost £15 to make). A year previously.. same argument (which ended up being bought so I lost) over a £600 designer handbag.

Brand name, style, new-fashions... richer people's desires.. less richer people's aspirations but desires to compete and show-off..... do I want to sell £40 jackets against all the other low-to-middle range retailers... or go for some luxury specialised item to target the people who wouldn't flinch at spending £600 on a handbag? Even in a depression, there are rich people around, and rich attitudes.

A few sales from the top-end at big margin, may be much more rewarding. I'm not 100% sure about the luxury market.. but just pure internet retailing at tighter margin doesn't make you a winner either. It is so much more complex than that.

Necessities May Not Be Profitable

Of course, not all textile or apparel firms were unprofitable in the 1930s. If you look at the exceptions in the textile and apparel field, you could see something that could be important in sorting out investment opportunities. Surprisingly, luxury goods do better in a depression than basic necessities.

This requires some explaining. You might expect that luxury sales would fall away and only necessities would be purchased during a slump. But this is only half true. The majority whose spending power has fallen will spend the little money they have on necessities. But that does not mean that the people who purvey those necessities are going to make much of a profit.

It makes no difference whether the industry has a product that is "essential." Bread is essential, but baking has often been less profitable than selling diamonds, which are not necessities. Many products of the textile industry are essential. Most of the time people have to wear clothes, especially in northern climates. That did not keep the textile industry in profits in the last depression.

When the dust settles after a depression has bottomed, the people who are in solid financial condition have more money to spend, not less. As the 1930s progressed, the marketing of most goods was skewed to emphasise luxury, enhanced comfort, or high fashion, because of the skewing of the income distribution. The market split with the large majority of families and unattached individuals spending their few dollars on low-cost commodities, and the minority settle a trend that continued after recovery toward high-income spending behaviour.

The net effect of the fall in income and weakness of the economy was to increase the competition for the high-end income market. Companies began to stress luxury, greater service, higher quality foods, silks (and rayons) rather than cottons, higher octane gas, ect.

Luxury Sales Slip at the Onset of Slumps

It is important to keep in mind, however, that sales of luxury goods tend to fall in the early stages of a slump. They recover only after the depression bottoms out and the stockmarket has resumed its upturn. Stories in the January 1, 1930 issue of the New York Times reported the complete confidence of most of America about economic prospects for 1930, in spite of the stock market crash.

Most people did not care about the stock market because they held few or no stocks. Those who did have stocks and knew their prices cared. As a first effect, luxury sales dried up. This is partly because richer people are more sophisticated about the economy, and it was mainly they who were hurt when the stock market crashed.

Speciality Lines and Fashion Changes

In the recovery from the next slump. many industries will tend to move toward speciality lines and fashion changes with luxury orientation to maximise their profits and reduce price competition. Much product innovation will also come in expensive wrapping. [goes on to innovations in tech..] Unless the society has become so violent than no one can risk marketing with an emphasis on luxury, you will see a growing tilt in that direction. Products will be regeared to appeal to the upscale buyer. Luxury travel and consumption will increase while downscale won't.

treliac

dopester wrote: »

A year previously.. same argument (which ended up being bought so I lost) over a £600 designer handbag.

Not really. Your attitude to money makes you a winner. All those savings ready to put down on a property when the time is right.

treliac

Just think, in ten years time, some entrepreneur will come along to our high streets, populated solely by cafes, hairdressers and pawnbrokers, and they will open a shop selling clothes - real life ones that you can touch and try on.

It will be a complete novelty, a hugely successful moneyspinner, and a whole new way of shopping will rise like a phoenix!

wageslave

treliac wrote: »

Just think, in ten years time, some entrepreneur will come along to our high streets, populated solely by cafes, hairdressers and pawnbrokers, and they will open a shop selling clothes - real life ones that you can touch and try on.

It will be a complete novelty, a hugely successful moneyspinner, and a whole new way of shopping will rise like a phoenix!

In fifty years time only the extremely rich and the bitterly poor will use real shops.
We will live in interesting times

dopester

treliac wrote: »

Not really. Your attitude to money makes you a winner. All those savings ready to put down on a property when the time is right.

Yes.. but with her heading towards 30.. employed after university and other education... no debt (worked part-time through uni, and a bit of support from me), also want her to be positioning herself to buy a house as well in the future. So... I can't help caring.

Have to give some latitude though... as their employment brings them into contact with top-end business people at big companies, and thus can secure new business. There could be something for having "the look" - bit of luxury with their working clothes and additional bits and pieces.. projecting success and professionalism, compared to being dressed in cheaper Primarki.

So long as they are still saving considerably more than they are spending each month, and carefully chosen luxury purchases are not so frequent, there is little I can complain about. Although next time I see her, I'll have to remember to tell her to try haggling with the luxury retailer (whatever the price-tag).

dopester

treliac wrote: »

Just think, in ten years time, some entrepreneur will come along to our high streets, populated solely by cafes, hairdressers and pawnbrokers, and they will open a shop selling clothes - real life ones that you can touch and try on.

It will be a complete novelty, a hugely successful moneyspinner, and a whole new way of shopping will rise like a phoenix!

Elsewhere.. I was reading a thread about death of some shopping locations/areas (might have been more US based). They were referring to how some sites were held together by a big name store (with was really the anchor for the other stores), and when they pulled-out, fewer people come so the other stores have a lot less passing footfall coming their way.

For an independent retailer (say fashion)... I'm thinking luxury niche is the way to go about it. fc123... we all know has a lot of experience in retail, and admits to one or two mistakes along the way (who doesn't?)... but I rate her as very smart in what she does. She will certainly know a lot more than my guesswork.

If I were an independent getting into fashion... I'm thinking maybe one, (possibly two later) stores in wealthy locations (but with no killer lease). Carefully planned guerilla marketing. Getting known for products + desirability amongst potential high-worth, big-spending clients, although not compromising on quality when you do spend on marketing. (No room for tackiness, or projecting that you are on a shoe-string budget when marketing to the high-end.) With an online presence to go with it.

In this environment, why risk over-extending to try and dominate the market, with all of the added risk, if you can find a way to profiting nicely to the tune of a few thousands pounds clear a month, by being nimble?

With manufacturing.. same again, but perhaps no stores. Innovative niche products.. like Kelly Kettle or Futumo oil drain valve* ... selling from net to customers around the world at probably good markup.

fc123 wrote: »

Hair lady in Dunstable....this programme has really put me off doing a future plan (a few years from now)...getting SFEDI accredited to be able to offer specialist business advice ~(but within the niche, creative sector and manufacturing/direct retailing) because I know what I would say to her but I don't think I could bear to actually say it. She was trapped by a fully liable lease with no hope of re-assigning it.