retail crash test dummies abound
Watching the rather sloppy way Grant O’Brien was moved on by Woolworths last week, I got to thinking about all the converging things happening that will impact the FMCG landscape over the next few years. A superficial look would suggest that things are pretty set, and change that happens will be incremental, but a closer look would suggest there is a lot of paddling going on under the surface.
These are the things I see:
Coles resurgent.
In the 40 years I have been around, I have seen the pendulum swing a couple of times, and it looks like Westfarmers have pulled off another mighty swing with Coles. Across pretty much any parameter you choose to look at, they are catching or have caught Woolworths, and remain on the improve.
Woolworths momentum.
In this high fixed cost retailing game, momentum is a huge contributor, not just to the financial outcomes, but to the day to day operations and shop floor “feel”. The momentum seems to be all against Woolies now, after enjoying the benefits for a long period. Their failure to drain cash from Coles by putting pressure on Bunnings with Masters has not just crunched their financial results, but it seems to have knocked the wind out of their confidence at the sales face across all their formats except perhaps Dan Murphy’s, which seems to be bucking the trend. Woolworths do not have a player in the office supplies game, which must be hurting them, further draining competitive resources.
Discounters are winning.
Aldi is doing really well, opening stores and taking share hand over fist. I have not seen the figures that would substantiate the notion that woolies are losing more to Aldi than Coles, but it would not surprise me at all. On top of Aldi’s blitzkrieg, it seems that their German competitor Lidl is coming. Lidl is a potent long term competitor with substantial experience across many markets.
Costco is seemingly carving out a niche, although not as aggressively as was first forecast, but the crowds in the Costco store at Auburn in Sydney would suggest they are not going away any time soon.
The $A.
After a period well above US $ par, the Aussie is back to more like its long term position. However, the carnage wrought by those few years on the mid sized supplier base cannot be turned around. Retailers by going offshore when they could and leaving their local supplier base to contract will have a continuing impact, as now the dollar is sensible again, there are few suppliers left with the wherewithal to be reliable national suppliers. It is also clear that those who have survived are a pretty resilient bunch, and are disinclined to replace their eggs back in a basket they cannot control.
Housebrands.
Coupled with the carnage of the high $A, the retailers strategic decision to rationalise proprietary SKU’s and replace them with tiers of housebrands to capture the proprietary margin has further led to the rout of the mid sized suppliers. Those left who might be inclined to chance their arm are generally not large enough, and lack the sophistication to manage a business relationship with a major retailer, but some will probably go broke trying.
Margins.
Many FMCG suppliers lose money on most sales to supermarkets. The negotiating power of the retailers, resulting trading terms and promotional guarantees that enable retailers to never pay beyond the discounted price, while restraining top line price increases to compensate has led to the situation where only a madman or the financially illiterate would stake their house on success in FMCG.
Innovation avoidance.
Markets evolve with innovation, but the barriers against success are so large that risk avoidance is the priority. Suppliers trumpet a new pack colour scheme as an “innovation”, and retailers get serious by asking the few second tier suppliers left to copy the proprietary market leader for yet another housebrand “innovation” . Retailers think they are good at innovation, but the experience from around the world as well as locally is to the contrary.
Promotion as marketing.
Continual price promotion only erodes the value of a brand, but brand building is a long term proposition, while staying on shelf is an immediate priority. Guess which wins, and we are rapidly approaching a brandless future beyond the few global mega brands that have the grunt to stay on shelf while spending with consumers to brand-build. Marketing budgets have been consumed by promotion spend. We have a generation of marketing people who have never experienced or even seen real marketing in FMCG.
Wholesale death.
Metcash as pretty much the last man standing is being squeezed by overheads and competing access to consumers outside the major chain supermarkets. Their recent financial results demonstrate the challenge of being the middleman in an environment where it is increasingly easy, and there is increasing motivation to go around the middleman. They seem to be trying with IGA, and with some success, but the local positioning of IGA mitigates against the mass merchandise wholesale business model they operate. Nevertheless, I do see IIGA as a potential bright spot for smaller suppliers who are unwilling or unable to service Woolies and Coles.
Opportunity?
Amongst the doom and gloom, I see several bright points of opportunity.
- While the traditional marketing strategies no longer work, it remain a fact that it is consumers who actually put their hands in their pockets to buy something. Retailers are just a choke point in the system exercising control, and the emergence of digital marketing offers small businesses the opportunity to engage and motivate their consumers to ignore the predations of retailers and express their purchase preferences with their money.
- The shortage of retailer suppliers may lead to a loosening of the noose around those remaining, and open opportunities for them to focus on a niche to deliver a product offer that the retailers do want, but that is hard to copy effectively. Combined with digital marketing, there are opportunities to engage with consumers in ways not dominated by price promotion and generic substitution.
- Local suppliers with a following in a region do have an opportunity to build a business. Coles have been playing with this for a while, and it does work, although the model of local supply does not sit very comfortably alongside the national supplier mentality that exists. For retailers to really get behind this opportunity to nurture “local” they will have to wear an increase in transaction costs, as well as make exceptions to their trading patterns. The big blokes may not, but there are real opportunities in the independents and non chain retail segments.
- Niche retailing will boom, and suppliers have the opportunity to participate. Harris Farm in Sydney continues to rise and rise, and even Thomas Dux, owned by Woolworths but operated largely separately are harbingers of the future. Consumers are increasingly engaged in their retail food shopping, they want their concerns and individual tastes to be met, and that cannot happen in a mass retail outlet focussing on discounting and housebrands.
I am sure there are thoughts I have missed, and would welcome feedback on them as well as comment on those above.
