OK-now what?
It's been a week since Coach dropped the Big One on its Special Markets Business. And the press is rife with comments from reps, customers, and other suppliers. And the prevailing tone of this discourse appears to be one of "To Hell with them. We can do without them. There are plenty of substitutes for them."
This is absolutely true, and absolutely dangerous. The so-called "Incentive Business" is based on Branded products-the theory goes that our end-users are consumers at heart and they want the things they see at retail. When a Brand exits our market, or severely limits its distribution, the entire market suffers.
The last week of conversations has led me to believe that a kinder, more conciliatory approach is called for. There's nothing we can do in the near term--Coach has made a decision and there's apparently no going back--but in the longer term our market should reach out to them.
There are plenty of clients (we all know who they are) that made great margin selling Coach, never transshipped it, and protected the Brand as much as possible. Should the entire Market be penalized for the actions of a few selfish resellers that did evil things with product? I would suggest that a unified front, with 5-6 of the really Big Kids in front, would make an impactful presentation to the Powers That Be on 34th Street in Noo Yawk.
But that's later--right now we should dispense with the anger and frustration and look at this from Coach's perspective. Were we in their shoes we might have done the same thing--there's nothing so damaging to a Brand (especially an upscale one) than product getting out of control and being sold for less than retail in unauthorized channels.
The onus is on-us (so to speak) to convince Coach that they can have good, healthy business with a higher level of control. That argument comes later, however. Right now the finger-pointng starts and we ask "Why?" a lot. And as much as I believe the market is owed a full explanation, I don't think it's ever gonna happen...
Pete
This is absolutely true, and absolutely dangerous. The so-called "Incentive Business" is based on Branded products-the theory goes that our end-users are consumers at heart and they want the things they see at retail. When a Brand exits our market, or severely limits its distribution, the entire market suffers.
The last week of conversations has led me to believe that a kinder, more conciliatory approach is called for. There's nothing we can do in the near term--Coach has made a decision and there's apparently no going back--but in the longer term our market should reach out to them.
There are plenty of clients (we all know who they are) that made great margin selling Coach, never transshipped it, and protected the Brand as much as possible. Should the entire Market be penalized for the actions of a few selfish resellers that did evil things with product? I would suggest that a unified front, with 5-6 of the really Big Kids in front, would make an impactful presentation to the Powers That Be on 34th Street in Noo Yawk.
But that's later--right now we should dispense with the anger and frustration and look at this from Coach's perspective. Were we in their shoes we might have done the same thing--there's nothing so damaging to a Brand (especially an upscale one) than product getting out of control and being sold for less than retail in unauthorized channels.
The onus is on-us (so to speak) to convince Coach that they can have good, healthy business with a higher level of control. That argument comes later, however. Right now the finger-pointng starts and we ask "Why?" a lot. And as much as I believe the market is owed a full explanation, I don't think it's ever gonna happen...
Pete
posted by Pete Mitchell at 9:44 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home