Luxury Institute News

May 8, 2013

Neiman Marcus sale could build more customer-focused brand

By Danielle Abril
Dallas Business Journal
May 7, 2013

While private equity investors of Neiman Marcus Group Inc. consider their exit strategy, a luxury retail expert predicts a move that could result in an increased emphasis on customer relations.

Milton Pedraza, CEO of The Luxury Institute LLC, said he belives that the next logical step for Dallas-based Neiman Marcus is to go public. The move would allow Neiman Marcus the freedom to focus on building relationships with its consumers.

“Neiman will have a very solid structure if they go public,” Pedraza said. “It will be customer-centric rather than shareholder-centric.”

Bloomberg reported earlier this week that TPG Capital and Warburg Pincus LLC, Neiman Marcus’ private equity investors, were considering selling the company or taking it public. The firms held their investment for eight years, 60 percent longer than the norm, according to Bloomberg.

Neiman Marcus declined to comment.

Neiman Marcus could take four different directions, according to Randall Ray, partner with Munck Wilson Mandala LLP. Ray has spent almost 25 years dealing with corporate legal matters and said one thing is clear in this situation: TPG and Warburg will choose the path that ends with the highest profit for them in the least amount of time.

The four options, according to Ray, are: filing an initial public offering, selling to a private equity firm, selling to a strategic buyer and choosing a dividend recapitalization.

Pedraza said it was “less likely” that the firms would sell to another private equity firm.

“It would take a very special private equity firm to do the things Neiman Marcus needs,” he said. “You need patient money to rebuild the brand.”

Pedraza cites online retailers Amazon and Zappos as companies that have benefited from answering solely to the consumer. He also said that other retailers, such as Nordstrom and Michael Kors, have been successful in their transformations to becoming publicly owned.

Pedraza also said the recovering economic climate offers an opportunity for TPG and Warburg Pincus to sell to the general public.

“It’s a good time to go public,” he said, adding that a booming economy would offer the best conditions for the move. Whatever road Neiman Marcus chooses, there will be few clues as to its direction until the transaction is complete.

“Unless Neiman Marcus feels compelled to make this information public, there won’t be a lot of transparency in the process,” Pedraza said.

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/2013/05/07/sale-of-neiman-marcus-could-impact.html

March 27, 2012

67pc affluent smartphone owners use mcommerce: study

By Rachel Lamb
Luxury Daily
March 26, 2012

More than two-thirds of affluent consumers who own a smartphone have used their mobile device to shop for products and services, but since they prefer the in-store experience, luxury brands have to start creating humanistic experiences on mobile.

Preference for the in-store experience, the cornerstone of luxury marketing, is the main reason why smartphone owners say they do not buy products through mobile. Mobile applications are the most common form of engagement for affluent consumers, indicating that luxury marketers need to step up the in-app experience.

“Consumers are becoming so much more mobile and we need to figure out how to translate that mobility into a humanistic experience,” said Milton Pedraza, CEO of the Luxury Institute.

“Apps are becoming ubiquitous, so it’s what we do with them that make the experience more extraordinary that will make the difference,” he said. “How the app is being used by the consumer or to contact someone who represents the brand is now where the real opportunity lies.”

The Luxury Institute study was conducted over the first quarter of 2012.

Respondents reported an average net worth of $2.8 million.

Complicated commerce
Of the 67 percent of affluent consumers who shop via mobile, 63 percent of them have made purchases in the past 12 months, according to the study.

Furthermore, wealthy consumers who made purchases spent an average of $628.

Event tickets, gift cards, food and technology/personal electronics are the most-common type of mobile purchase, according to the study.

Preference to the in-store experience is the most-used reason for not making a mobile purchase.

However, other issues include “privacy and security issues,” “it seems complicated,” “the brands I purchase from do not offer mobile shopping” and “I don’t know how.”

Of luxury consumers with smartphones, 28 percent of them own an iPhone, 22 percent own an Android, 16 percent own a BlackBerry and 2 percent own another smartphone.

Appetizing
Of the 60 percent of affluent consumers in the United States who have a smartphone, approximately 73 percent of them use apps at least once per day, according to findings from the Luxury Institute.

Affluent consumers are using apps including Facebook, Angry Birds and Words With Friends, making them a prime spot for luxury mobile marketing. However, most high-end brands are not fully grasping the urgency that they not only need to be in mobile, but the leading innovators.

Of affluent consumers who own a smartphone, 80 percent of wealthy U.S. consumers report that they have downloaded an app.

Navigational and entertainment apps are the types of apps most frequently downloaded, including Facebook, Angry Birds and Words With Friends.

That said, these apps provide opportunities for luxury marketing. In fact, some brands have already taken advantage.

For example, department store chain Nordstrom is targeting aspirational consumers through mobile banner advertisements for its Nordstrom Rack locations in the popular gaming application, Words With Friends.

In addition, New York-based department store Bergdorf Goodman used Words With Friends to drive foot traffic to its store with a location-based banner ad promoting an in-house event.

However, what these results are telling marketers is that it is not just young consumers who enjoy gaming apps. The respondents of the study – older, more affluent consumers – are still citing Angry Birds, Facebook and Words With Friends as their favorite apps.

However, there is a fine line between marketing to adults and aspirational consumers.

“Brands do need to be as engaging as social media, but they cannot be gimmicky – they must be honest and real,” Mr. Pedraza said. “It is surprising that Facebook and games have reached all consumers, not just the young.

“That said, it is hard to extrapolate data over the next few years when technology and behavior are spending so quickly,” he said. “The speed of change among all consumers, not just the young but the old and affluent, is very quick.”

http://www.luxurydaily.com/67pc-affluent-smartphone-owners-use-mcommerce-study/

January 8, 2012

Management Consulting: Building Brand Loyalty Sweeps Clients Off Their Feet

By James D. Roumeliotis
WCW Insight
January 7, 2012

We constantly hear remarks and stories of deplorable customer service. I would think that brands would be more attentive and proactive. Unfortunately, this is not the case. You would have thought that they would make “devotion” a coherent strategy.

It should begin with the “trust” factor. Seth Godin, the highly respected marketer, asserts, “Institutions and relationships don’t work without trust. It’s not an accident that a gold standard in business is the “handshake”. Today, it’s easier to build a facade of trust. Not delivering impacts not on a firm per se but on an entire industry.

Some firms react to this by telling customers to “Read the fine print”. Financial Institutions cruise ship operators, and discount outlets are some of the most negligent in the customer service department.

Building “devotion” on the other hand, should be instinctive. If you cannot forge and emotional bridge to your client base your strategy needs a serious rethink. Branding strategy by definition means creating the right attitude to maintain loyalty to ethos of the firm, its products or services.

If you question this principle, think again. The internet and blogging throughout the social networks makes this imperative.

CRM is the key competitive differentiator CRM should be your first line of defense. Customers know the difference and it will separate your firm from your competitors. Loyal customers buy more and serve as de facto advocates of your brand.

Marty Neumeier states this clearly in his book, The Brand Gap:

“The brand is not what you say it is. It’s what they say it is.”

Talking either to prospects or current customers is paramount. If you do not recognize what your clients want or think how can you serve them better?

Not every firm takes the time to do this. You should if you wish to stand apart. It is worth the time and energy.

Take the example of Best Buy v. Amazon. The differences between the two organizations are transparent. If you buy something at Best Buy and decide you do not want the product or made a mistake and try to return the product, the response you will receive is “Sorry”.

Amazon, on the other hand, understands the context of online buying and has put into place the model for CRM. Make the wrong purchase or change your mind, the response is “No Problem”.

The end result is you will not think twice when buying a product Amazon sells or promotes.

Luxury Brand Management: The importance of customer loyalty

You would think that the situation would be clearer in luxury brand management. Guess again. Clients may be more discerning and have more DPI. But top products are not enough. CRM should accompany the product.

“Hermès has impeccable products, the top-tier of luxury goods,” said Milton Pedraza, CEO of the Luxury Institute, New York. “In terms of what customers want, they have the top design, quality and craftsmanship. What Hermès may need, however, is a refresher course in customer experience.”

“Consumers tell us in research that Hermès is the pinnacle of product delivery, but they could become far better in customer experience,” Mr. Pedraza stated.

Audi, the German automobile manufacturer focuses relentlessly on making its cars the number one premium car brand of choice. CRM is clearly one of their keys to success. They understand that the right product and after service and you win a client for a lifetime.

The Audi approach delivers excellent customer satisfaction. Internally, they made the firm the “best” place to work as well. Why?

By attracting the top-notch people, they can deliver customer experience in line with expectations. Spending money on appropriate marketing to attract new clients is not enough. Staff must have the skills to close the deal. An inadequately trained sales force will botch the sale. A positive buying experience is fundamental. It is what I refer to as ‘human marketing” not “buy this carpet, this carpet flies”.

The name of the game is to build a lasting, profitable relationship with them, and turn them into loyal and devoted repeat customers. If you do this with élan, then you have created a cadre of brand ambassadors.

Whether it’s B2C or B2B, sales and marketing people should co-exist. Every one in the sales chain needs to be brought on board including the receptionist, delivery team, and oddly enough those who work on the financial side.

Take the case of YO! Sushi established in the UK. They initiated the Japanese concept of “kaiten” sushi bars in the West. They serve Japanese style food on a conveyor belt travelling 8cm (about 3 inches) per second. It is the original and most famous sushi brand in the UK.

The experience is fun and exciting. Clients love the place.

Simon Woodroffe, the firm’s visionary entrepreneur and founder totally understands the nature of CRM and building brand loyalty. By doing so, the enterprise not only attracts new clients via marketing, it gains their continued patronage, which covers advertising costs.

Employees are well trained and know that they are the “marketing” team.

On the basis of these examples, it is necessary to take into account:

1) In a progressive customer driven entity, training and developing the human assets should be an ongoing process

2) Companies should be an enemy of the “status quo”

3) Mystery shopping (in person and/or by phone, as well as online) should be frequently conducted to get a sense of what an actual customer experiences – then taking action to rectify and improve the experience.

http://www.whitefieldconsulting.com/wordpress/?p=11303

December 10, 2010

Borrowing from Avon and Dell to Sell Shirts

Dallas shirtmaker J. Hilburn combines direct sales with custom tailoring, and reaches out to an untapped male market

By John Tozzi
BusinessWeek
December 9, 2010

You can’t buy Dallas clothier J. Hilburn’s shirts in a retail store or online. Nonetheless, the company expects to sell 60,000 of them this year by dispatching salespeople to customers’ homes or offices to take measurements and suggest fabrics and styles. They send their orders to a factory near Macau, China, where shirts are cut and sewn from Italian fabric. Buyers receive them in two to three weeks and pay between $80 and $150, less than half the price of similar shirts sold in some high-end stores.

The company is the brainchild of a couple of former finance types who set out to serve men who see shopping as a chore. “No one’s really thought about how to engage male shoppers,” says Veeral Rathod, 31, one of the founders. Rathod and co-founder Hil Davis (the company took its moniker from his full name, J. Hilburn Davis IV) have borrowed from the direct-sales model of Avon Products (AVP), the supply chain management of Toyota Motor (TM), customization techniques pioneered by Dell (DELL), and Amazon.com’s (AMZN) ease of shopping.

Some 30,000 people have bought clothing or accessories from Hilburn, the company says. And 93 percent of its customers return for a second purchase, says Davis. Since Hilburn was founded in 2007, its sales have tripled each year and are on track to top $9 million in 2010, driven by growing demand for its shirts as well as newer products such as trousers, cuff links, and cashmere sweaters. “Customers are basically saying, ‘You’ve become my solution, now offer me more products,’ ” says Davis, 38.

Jim Pitkow started buying from Hilburn 10 months ago for the convenience and price. Pitkow, chief executive officer of a San Mateo (Calif.) software startup called Attributor, used to visit tailors during trips to London or send his measurements to shirtmakers, which sometimes resulted in a poor fit. Until he started buying from Hilburn, “nobody came to measure or fit me properly,” he says. The shirts cost about half what he used to pay.

While new customers can find sales reps through Hilburn’s website, most come through referrals. The company has 650 “style advisers” who earn commissions of up to 25 percent on clothing they sell after paying $399 for fabric samples, sales materials, and training. Most are women with school-age children looking for extra income, Davis says. As in other direct-sales companies, they get a cut of sales made by reps they recruit. Each Hilburn rep, though, can sign up only five others directly, which Davis says creates an incentive to find the best salespeople rather than simply recruiting as many as possible.

Amy Mancini started selling Hilburn shirts in 2008. A mother of three in West Boylston, Mass., the former nurse says she earns about $60,000 annually, spending between 20 and 25 hours a week managing other reps and visiting customers. “I have clients anywhere from college students all the way up to presidents and CEOs,” she says. The sales calls are crucial to getting measurements right and making customers feel comfortable about buying a garment they can’t try on. Clients’ measurements are stored in a database, and the company plans to launch an online store next year where customers can order new shirts once they’ve been fitted.

The model removes some traditional up-front costs of retailing. “You’ve got a sales force you’re not paying until they sell things. You’re not paying to make the shirt until the shirt is sold,” says Brian O’Malley, a Hilburn board member and partner at Battery Ventures. The Menlo Park (Calif.) venture capital firm has invested $7.25 million in the company. Hilburn is replicating custom tailoring on a mass scale, says Milton F. Pedraza, CEO of the Luxury Institute, a consultant to high-end brands. “They’re trying to scale a model that already works,” he says. The prices also give Hilburn an advantage: Pedraza says he pays more than $300 for similar shirts.

Making custom shirts, though, brings its own inefficiencies. The fabric for each must be cut individually, not in bulk from one template, the way off-the-rack shirts are made. The company’s contract manufacturer in China eventually created a new pattern-making department where the shirt shapes are sized on computers and cut automatically. Still, each seamstress can make only about six shirts a day.

Hilburn recently hired Lawrence Hagenbuch, a veteran of General Electric (GE), as chief operating officer to help streamline manufacturing and distribution. Davis and Rathod want to halve the time it takes to get clothing to customers. Among other steps, Davis wants to box individual orders leaving the factory in China so they can be shipped directly to customers instead of having to break up shipments once they reach the U.S. “The apparel supply chain hasn’t evolved since the 1920s,” says Davis. “That’s our opportunity.”

The bottom line: J. Hilburn is trying to create a new retail model for men’s fashion by combining customization with direct sales.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_51/b4208026699046.htm

December 2, 2010

Supreme Court deals blow to luxury claims against online counterfeit sales

By Peter Finocchiaro
Luxury Daily
December 1, 2010

Luxury brands hoping for greater legal support for combating the sale of counterfeit goods online were dealt a blow as the United States Supreme Court declined to hear Tiffany & Co.’s trademark infringement lawsuit against eBay to effectively place the onus of counterfeit enforcement on brands.

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals had previously ruled that manufacturers are responsible for reporting cases of trademark infringement to eBay. The ruling will make it harder for luxury brands to combat counterfeiting online as sites that allow third-party sales account for tens of billions of dollars in commerce each year, according to one legal expert.

“What the Supreme Court has done by refusing to hear the appeal is place the onus on brands as opposed to Web sites hosting or providing counterfeit sales, “said Mark Rosenberg, intellectual property attorney at Sills Cummis & Gross PC, New York.

“The Appeals Court decision basically says that if eBay is not aware of the infringement, they cannot be held liable for the counterfeiting, which is relatively simplistic,” he said.

“EBay has not affirmative duty to see what’s going on – it’s silly.”

Court ruling
Tiffany originally filed its suit against eBay in 2004, seeking damages for the sale of counterfeit goods on the auction site.

A U.S. district court found that  eBay could not be held accountable because it did not intentionally induce anyone to infringe upon Tiffany’s trademark and because it lacked specific knowledge of infringement by any seller, according to Andy Lustigman, attorney at law and principal of The Lustigman Firm, New York.

Sills, Cummis & Gross’ Mr. Rosenberg said that eBay could conceivably develop an algorithm to detect suspicious items for sale based on the presence of keywords such as “faux” or “replica.”

However, the court ruling stops short of mandating such screening tactics.

EBay would likely lack the expertise to determine the presence of a counterfeit even if it did inspect every good on its site, according to Mr. Lustigman.

Therefore, the trademark holder has  to report infringement in order to legally oblige a Web site hosting such sales to remove the item in question.

EBay has argued that Tiffany’s legal challenges were not motivated by the threat of counterfeiting on the Web site, but by the prospect of legitimate branded items generating revenue for merchants in the second-hand market.

The online auction brand also noted that the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and the trail court found that it exceeds legal requirements for fighting the sale of counterfeits on its Web site.

How to counteract counterfeits?
Web sites that allow third-party sales such as eBay and Amazon account for tens of billions of dollars in commerce each year.

Which begs the question: How can luxury manufacturers protect their brand equity and minimize the impact of counterfeit sales on such Web sites if the law places the burden of enforcement in their hands?

One solution is to do the actual grunt work of policing the sites in question and proactively investigate potential cases of infringement and counterfeiting.

“Luxury goods marketers must be vigilant in policing Internet sales of their products and to notify the parties that are facilitating the transactions of counterfeit products,” Mr. Lustigman said.

“Brands should be signing up for product alerts on major Internet sellers such as eBay, and inspecting the listings to determine if a product advertised appears to be genuine, taking into account the description, country of origin, quantity being offered, the distribution channel and other similar indicia,” he said.

“If a brand becomes aware that a product being listed in counterfeit, it should affirmatively notify the Internet seller of the infringement.”

However, another solution could be to increase the brand’s visibility and commerce presence on the Internet.

The issue of counterfeiting and trademark infringement arose in the first place in part because luxury brands have been so slow to adopt strong digital positions, according to Milton Pedraza, CEO of the Luxury Institute, New York.

By expanding out their presence on the Internet with fully realized ecommerce strategies, while leveraging channels such as social media to galvanize brand advocates against countefeiting practices.

“Luxury brands should be aggressive online,” Mr. Pedraza said. “It’s good for combating counterfeiting, [as well as] great commerce and what consumers want.”

http://www.luxurydaily.com/supreme-court-deals-blow-to-luxury-claims-against-online-counterfeit-sales/