Nov 27, 2014 | Branding, Category, Change, Marketing, retail, Small business
A short while ago, I posted “10 strategies for SME’s to beat the supermarket gorillas at their own game” which generated quite a bit of comment and feedback. Amongst the feedback were a number of requests to go into more detail on each of the strategies, and so this is the first of the series, focussed on understanding the business model of the supermarkets.
I deliberately used the word “Gorillas” because of the extraordinarily concentrated nature of Australia’s supermarket retailers, with Coles and Woolworths between them holding over 70% of FMCG sales depending on the category, and whose numbers you believe.
You know the old question: “where do the 500kg gorillas sleep?”
Answer: “anywhere they bloody like”
That was the way it was, a comfy duopoly, however, more recently there have been some major strategy alterations by Coles which has dramatically lifted their financial performance, and Aldi has successfully carved out a growing niche as a third retail presence. In addition, there are still some very good independent retailers around operating out of the wholesaler Metcash, who also competes with some of their own and franchised retail outlets.
This mix, combined with the opportunities suppliers have to sell into food service and institutional markets and increasingly direct to consumers via the net and other means makes for an environment where the agile and insightful suppliers can be very successful despite the obstacles, but it is a very challenging environment.
The concept of business models is well known, in summary, it is the expression of how a business makes money. It always involves a matrix of revenue generated, the fixed and variable costs of generating that revenue, and the choices that the business makes about its customers and how they will be serviced, and the way they incur the costs of that servicing.
Supermarkets are a great example of a number of seemingly similar competitors that have slightly differing business models. At a macro level they have strong similarities, relying on volume, price, and shopper numbers to succeed, but everyone who shops knows that Woolworths is not Coles, is not Aldi.
However, they do have some common building blocks.
-
- Revenue generation. Supermarkets generate revenue on both sides of the equation.
- Shoppers buy products, paying at the checkout.
- Suppliers “pay” for shelf space via a range of charges levied for every variable the retailers can dream up. Volume discounts, payment terms, promotional levies, preferred shelf positioning, promotional slots, access to sales information, and a host of others. Some are items for which suppliers receive an invoice, others are taken as discounts off the invoice price, increasingly applied automatically as a part of the trading term package.
- Cost management. Supermarkets work on very low percentage margins, relying on the volume to generate the cash margins.
- Fixed costs are a significant part of retailers total costs, made up of the provision of the retail floor space, the logistics infrastructure and personnel. Supermarkets attack their fixed cost base aggressively using their scale as negotiation tools with landlords and logistics suppliers, while keeping a very substantial proportion of front line retail staff as casuals rather than permanent employees so they can better adjust staff levels to match activity. The sorts of choices retailers make are between high density shopping centre locations Vs stand alone locations. There are costs and benefits to each which are considered as a part of their strategic decision making.
- The biggest variable cost is the cost of good sold, and they similarly use their scale to manage those costs downward. Tactics vary between retailers, but the core game is to maximise their margins while keeping prices as low as possible to attract the volume buyers. This is an extremely delicate balance.
- Transaction costs are usually pretty well hidden in most businesses, but are really significant in the case of supermarkets simply due to the number of transactions they make. For example, there is a cost to managing the buying relationship with a supplier, but the larger the supplier, the less is the total costs/unit of sale of managing that relationship. This has led to a dramatic reduction of the number of suppliers supermarkets have in any category over the last 15 years or so a trend further accelerated by the increasingly common strategy of limiting the number of proprietary brands in any category substituting house-branded products, and reducing the number of relationships to be managed. This has made negotiating shelf space increasingly hard, and because of scarcity, increasingly expensive for suppliers, in turn putting extreme pressure on small suppliers.
- Customer service and relationships. The retailers have each made choices about the pricing, location, ranging, and service strategies that sets them apart from each other, and more subtly, they have back office strategies that differ. However, their common aim is to have as much market share ass possible, as volume is the profit generator.
- As in any market, no retailer can be all things to all people, so each makes the choice of the “ideal” customer, and markets towards them, grateful for any overlap. Increasingly the marketing is being supported by customer loyalty cards and the data mining and personalised promotional opportunities that technology is delivering, but the fundamental measures of success remain unchanged: number of shoppers, share of wallet, and basket size.
- The two major retailers have very large marketing budgets which they spend in a wide variety of ways, across all channels of communication with customers and potential customers, and often in joint activity with their suppliers, which inevitably, the suppliers end up funding in return for volume. The smaller the retailer, the less “mass market” they are, so the tactics tend to differ, although strategically, finding willing supplier partners is a core part of every retailers marketing mix.
- Consumers generally want choice when they are in a supermarket, the more the better, in any category. Woolworths and Coles stores carry 12-20,000 Sku’s (Stock keeping unit) depending on the size and location of the store, a typical IGA might carry 8-10,000, while Aldi carry just over 1,000. The sku’s carried in any store also reflect of the demographic and cultural mix. The Woolworths store in Auburn in Sydney has a significantly different product mix to the Woolworths of a similar size in Double Bay.
- Every retailer uses some form of category management disciplines as a means to monitor, adjust and locate their inventory onto the sales face in the way that best meets their customers needs and maximises impulse pick-up. This is always a data intensive mix of the volume and margin of the individual Sku, (such as Ski strawberry yoghurt 200gm) group of similar Sku’s (all strawberry 200gm yoghurt) subcategory (all strawberry yoghurt) and category (all yoghurt) and between categories. They make choices about how many brands and types to keep in stock, where they put them, on shelf and in relation to other yogurts, and indeed other chilled products. A facing of yoghurt added is a facing of some other product gone, as the sides of the stores are not elastic. At the core of the category management activities is the need to best satisfy consumers, whilst competing effectively and delivering maximised margins.
Being agile, persistent, and prepared to experiment are about the best qualities a supplier to supermarkets can have.
Sep 2, 2014 | Branding, Communication, Customers, Governance, retail
Last night Media Watch on the ABC did a piece on the “news report” done on one of the 6.30 current affairs programs on a commercial station. The “report” was a 15 minute advertising free expose on the sourcing of the fresh produce the retailer sells.
It was a prime example of so called “Native advertising”.
Native advertising is just a term dreamt up by marketers, aided and abetted by commercially desperate media owners to make excuses for polluting the so-called news with favorable commentary. In this case, the channel concerned had a share of the retailers very substantial advertising dollars way in excess of their audience market share, and the “report” was nothing less than a glowing tribute to the quality and freshness of the produce.
Smells like advertising to me.
The “news” already seems to have been so polluted by the populist lowest common denominator “cat up a tree” stories that seem to dominate alongside sensationalist claims about today’s brand of extremist, that why would a puff piece on how fresh a retailers produce is make a difference?
Simple answer, because it is nonsense.
The retailer concerned does do a good job, works hard to deliver produce as fresh as they can given the constraints of their mass market model, competitive pressures and profitability objectives, but to put as much lipstick on the pig as the report did is really going too far.
You can watch Media Watch’s (the segment starts at 8.45) commentary for a while on the ABC’s iView, but if you are still confused about the line between advertising and journalism, and the chance of our institutions and enterprises being held accountable by the media, have a look at this satirical video by John Oliver that presses the point.
We are pretty savvy consumers of media these days, question is, are we savvy enough?
Jul 21, 2014 | Branding, Change, Marketing, retail
It is fascinating to watch the evolution of the marketing of the two retail gorillas, Coles and Woolworths.
It is clear what they are doing, setting out to engage consumers with the freshness, range and provenance of their produce, and selling consumers all the packaged goods they need on the way through the stores. Their strategies are working, but more importantly, they highlight the depth of the opportunity for those few independent retailers left alive, and points to the way the more fragmented food service, ingredient, and emerging home delivery and farmers markets should be marketing themselves.
Coles and Woolies remain mass retailers, vulnerable on the edges.
A few years ago Woolies were undisputed heavweight champ, Coles the belted contender with no hope, but how things can change with a new trainer. Coles has been rejuvenated, and whilst their financial results have been hugely improved, they have a way to go to catch Woolies, but in the marketing stakes, they have taken the lead.
The sponsorship of “Masterchef” was a masterstroke, and they have followed up and leveraged the success extraordinarily well, with Woolies just starting to respond by buying Jamie Oliver to shape up to Heston, Curtis, and Status Quo (I was young in the 70’s) and a massive and very well co-ordinated marketing budget. Bit of an uneven contest.
From a consumers perspective, increasingly their choices are limited to brands the retailers control. Wether they be Coles new “Heston Blumenthal” brand, Woolies “Jamie Oliver” brand, or one of the various other housebrand versions at differing price-points, and pack configurations, they are all housebrands.
Suppliers of packaged proprietary brands have been progressively squeezed out, and those left are mostly sourced via global supply chains rather than manufacturing domestically, where almost nobody is left standing.
Change always starts at the fringes, as we have seen time and again over our history. Change is happening now in the food value chain, but at the fringes. Organics, local produce, micro suppliers of almost personalised products, restaurants differentiating on the basis of seasons and local supply, “pick your own” farmers markets, food tourism, various home delivery services, all happening outside the supermarket, some pretty basic marketing communicating the differentiated offer.
Jamie and Heston can take their money to beat each other up in the ad breaks of the nightly news. The increasing number of us who really care about what we eat, will go to the local blokes who genuinely care about what they deliver to us, and buy from them.
Jun 18, 2014 | Collaboration, Customers, retail, Small business
Strategyaudit.com.au
Chain stores dominate our grocery shopping environment, they have developed all the advantages of scale, and use them to the advantage of their shareholders, by delivering returns, and to customers by delivering low prices.
The model works, in Australia 75% of the grocery shopping dollar goes to one of two retailers, and small retailers have been decimated.
However, small retailers are making a comeback, the ones left are good, good enough to deliver value to their customers in different ways to the chains, and they are making a good bob.
They compete with a variety of strategies, all of which have elements of the following 10 rules.
- Make the store look warm, friendly, inviting, and, importantly, current. The last Valentines day, a client put in huge volumes of roses on which he put some very cheap prices compared to the highway robbery employed elsewhere, but he also had a promotion of Chocolates and a voucher for collaborative promotion with the grog shop two doors down, on sale. He did sell a lot of roses, a pile of chocolate, and got a slice from the bubbles the grog shop sold.
- Collaborative retailing is a really effective way of building sales and relationship s with customers. The example above worked really well, as have others that group retailers of differing women’s apparel, dresses, shoes, hairdressing services, et al together.
- Experiment, with everything under your control. Store layout, range, price, stock weight and position, proximity of complementary products, promotional activity, it is a long list limited only by imagination and energy. However, experimenting is not the only game, you need to track results, now easy via the electronic tills, and if nothing else, Excel pivot tables. Understand what works, and improve it for next time, eliminating the things that prove not to work. It is a simple formula, challenging to implement consistently, but in principal, simple. Learn as you go, and as the you experiment more, you will also find your depth of tacit knowledge also increases. A small business can put in place an experiment, have the outcomes and a resulting tactical outlook while their bigger competitors are still trying to get a meeting together to decide if it may be a good idea.
- Use technology widely, not just in the tracking of sales, but in the management of your operations, and most importantly, the engagement of your consumers. Make your website the co-ordination centre of your marketing efforts. Mobile, email, social media platforms, blog posts, all potentially have a place, but mostly you cannot do them all, so make informed choices. However, you need to recognise that digital is not free, there are both operating and opportunity costs attached, and for most SME’s, a capability gap. Outsource all you can, which is getting easier by the day, and importantly, track the results of everything you are doing on line
- Make sure you have a website that does you justice. A mate sent this to me this link to Victor Churchill, a butcher in Sydney’s eastern suburbs, and now I just want to go there.
- Personalise, personalise, personalise. The chain retailers have “mass market” business model, they cannot easily personalise their offer to the customer base. They may have a technology edge because they have the resources, but how often does the casual filling the shelves greet a customer by name? Enquire after their kids, and ask how the fruit basket you supplied last week for the centre-piece of your dinner party work out?.
- Specialise in what you do best, deliver “depth” to consumers where the mass retailers can only deliver “breadth” to a mass market.
- Be the expert in your category. If you are a produce retailer, know where the best strawberries come from, and when they will be available , similarly, a fashion retailer needs to be current with the trendsetters, to know what is coming, what will accessorise easily, and how the fashion can be tailored to the market they are serving. Most people want to deal with, and seek the affirmation of experts, be the expert, and they will keep on coming back.
- Apply the disciplines of Category Management to your inventory and space management. In its simplest form, Category Management is a mindset that seeks to allocate finite and valuable shelf space on the basis of maximising the customer experience, while delivering optimised profitability and long term commercial sustainability. This can get as complicated as you like, but for an SME, building an excel database leveraging the capability of pivot tables, tools virtually every business has sitting on their PC already, is sufficient to get started.
- Watch the cash. This one always gets a run. Retailers greatest cost, and biggest risk is usually inventory, and inventory is a raging consumer of cash. On the other hand, the oldest adage in retailing is “stock sells stock”, so there is a tightrope to be walked. Perhaps the most valuable, and in SME’s underused, performance measure in retailing is stock turn. Use it aggressively to fine tune your range, and inventory.
None of these “rules” are of great value separately, but together, they offer a potent competitive tool set for small retailers.
May 6, 2014 | Change, Management, Marketing, retail, Small business
Courtesy High McLeod @ Gaping Void
Retail has changed, very quickly and in a fundamental way, but not for everyone.
Retailers, the blokes with the bricks and mortar still hold sway in most markets, but to varying degrees, and can continue to do so if they are as smart as they have been in the past.
Consumers no longer have to go down to the store to buy much of their stuff, their store increasingly is in the palm of their hand. That is fine for cameras, refrigerators, and perhaps baked beans in a can, but not so good for fresh produce, meat, fruit & veg, and dairy, categories that are driving the profitability of supermarket retailers.
If we know anything, we know new models will come to light.
In the past, producers needed retailers to break down their bulk product, whether it be jeans, baked beans or refrigerators, and sell to consumers, but now consumers can go direct. So, it is not just the retailers who face change, it is the producers.
Held to ransom for years by retail that in effect sold them retail real estate while selling to the consumers, suppliers have some leverage back, and a few of them are game enough to love it.
The question both needs to answer is how they can best meet the needs of the newly empowered by information, consumer, who does not really care who supplies them the product, it is just about the convenience, choice, delivery and price of a transaction.
Looked at from this perspective, the retailer has a role to play in the relationships consumers have with brands, and suppliers, but they must make their money from a different model, one that relies on the manner in which they “touch” the sales process, rather than being the one solely in charge.
Sales leads that come from social media and the web are still just as likely to generate a sale in a physical retailer as they are on the web, and given that web sales are still a small proportion of total sales, using the web should be a seen as an opportunity, a bonus, not a threat, as Tesco in Korea has demonstrated.
It is perhaps telling of the times that the ACCC is mounting a case against Coles for beating up on its suppliers to improve its earnings. Nothing new there, but Coles management has an obligation to maximise earnings for shareholders.
The horse has bolted.
SME’s in the Australian food supply chain are now a rare breed, killed off my the high $A, retailer housebrand strategies, the scale of multinational competition, and poor management. The two retailers seem to have realised that without local supply, their long term options are limited, and so seem to be softening their short term demands in recognition that the sustainability of the food production value chain is in their interests.
PS Earlier today, after the initial publication of this post, I became aware that Big Sister Foods had been put in the hands of the administrators. While Big Sister is an Aussie company, part of that small club of natives, it spent 20 years as a part of Reckitt & Coleman in the 70’s and 80’s. Sadly I am not surprised, as their current website is about the worst I have ever seen, perhaps indicative of the declining state of the business.
Apr 24, 2014 | Branding, Category, Customers, Marketing, retail
Businesses spend many millions trying to understand the way consumers consider the choices confronting them in a supermarket. With up to 30,000 items on shelf, and some categories having hundreds of choices, it is a key consideration.
A mix of psychology, data science, habitual behaviour, discretionary spending dollars available, and individual preferences all play a role.
A complicated mix.
However, there is a way to at least clarify part of the mix.
Consumers use decision trees, usually without thinking about them when they are in a supermarket making their purchases.
Some purchases are automatic, a habitual choice, others are made after a considered set of choices on a range of factors important to the individual are made, and there are, obviously, many shades of this continuum that apply to a highly personal process.
Imagine a consumer approaching the dairy case looking for fruited yoghurt. Some may just buy their usual brand, flavour and size irrespective of everything else. Others will make a series of choices that will vary for every person, and may look something like the decision tree below.
It will differ for each individual, some will choose the brand first, others the flavour, or the size and price, and a whole range of variations on these factors, but based on the total sales, supermarkets will range products, and give them shelf positions and space based on sales, gross margins, delivered margins, and various promotional strategies. They also use a decision tree.
Retailers and suppliers spend huge amounts of effort, and resources. on this category management exercise, trying to read the consumers mind, and anticipate their reactions to various combinations that are available to them.
It is a data intensive exercise, well suited to the “big data” techniques that are evolving around us. Combining checkout data with store loyalty cards is now becoming commonplace, what is emerging currently is the integration of mobile and social media data into the mix.
As you walk into the store to buy something, there has already been lots of effort gone into reading your mind, and there will be lots of effort and money expended in store in an effort to manage your purchase decisions.
