Tag / Wal-Mart

by Frank Maduri

Amazon Grocery Store Plan: Will It Help Or Hurt Retail?

Amazon recently announced a plan to expand into the retail grocery channel beyond their current presence resulting from their acquisition of Whole Foods. Many people know that the internet shopping giant bought Whole Foods for about $14 billion in June 2017, which provided them with a foothold into the grocery business.

The image of Whole Foods from the consumer standpoint is that it is an expensive, almost elitist place to shop for groceries that many in the general public feel they can get a better value at a mainstream grocery chain. Amazon attempted to alter this consumer sentiment around Whole Foods, but when those were unsuccessful, this could have at least contributed to their decision to enter into the retail grocery business in a way that will reach a wider gamut of consumer demographics.

The plan is to open stores in targeted U.S. markets with just a few outlets in each market to test out the concept. The first Amazon grocery store of this type will open in Los Angeles as soon as the end of 2019, if everything goes as planned.

Then, the concept would be rolled out to ten or twelve strategic geographic areas throughout the country. The new grocery brand would sell less expensive products than Whole Foods, would carry a large selection of Amazon’s private label brands, and would carry national brands that are precluded from the Whole Foods shelves based on the food product standards set by that chain.

The decision to carry those national brands would open up a pathway for Amazon to benefit from the huge amounts of money that those companies spend for shelf space and advertising at Point of Purchase type of campaigns. The new grocery brand would also provide Amazon with a way to enroll more people in Prime memberships with some sort of promotional incentive either at the point of enrollment, or for future shopping trips.

Currently, Amazon provides a 10% discount for Prime members when they shop at Whole Foods store locations. This will serve as a model for the new grocery brand in order to incentivize memberships to their Prime service. Amazon will also be able to cross-promote more items from their website during an in-store shopping experience.

Furthermore, Amazon announced in the plans for this new grocery brand that they will have a service that allows shoppers to select the items on the website and set it up for pick-up in the store location, creating what Amazon believes will be the new way that the consumer purchases groceries.

The decision will have a gigantic ripple effect on the grocery industry. The established retail grocery chains are going to have to lower their overhead costs prior to Amazon entering their industry space. That could translate into job cutbacks, layoffs, or restructuring the number of full-time workers or hours that are given out by the mainstream grocery players. The one controllable aspect of a low profit margin business such as the grocery channel is the labor cost.

The other significant component to this news by Amazon is that they are looking to lease spaces that also allow them to sell beauty and personal care products. Those types of products generally have a higher profit margin, and Amazon has their own private label brands which allow for excellent cost control.

My past writing on the food industry and the retail shopping changes that have taken place over the years have centered more on certain chains going bankrupt or discontinuing a product due to a recall or sluggish sales. This situation is rare: a new player actually joining the brick and mortar segment of the retail landscape.

The timing for Amazon is advantageous too because of the amount of large retail spaces that are vacant now with the end of Sears, Toys R Us, and a slew of regional grocery chains. The speculation is that Amazon could lease some of the former Sears locations for this new grocery store concept.

In the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states, the amount of retail space left from the demise of regional grocery chains such as A&P and Pathmark, create a huge opportunity for Amazon to get an advantageous lease term. Then, they can reach a huge variety of demographics in that part of the country which is so densely populated.

The industry data on the grocery business in America is compelling and certainly has been on the radar screen for Amazon for a while now. The U.S. grocery business is estimated at $830 billion and between Whole Foods and Amazon’s other online business they have a 4% market share. Wal Mart has a 21% market share of the grocery business, and Amazon is looking to grow their share and get in front of mainstream consumers with their private label brands.

The competition will face some very difficult pricing pressures from Amazon entering this part of the industry, should the concept launch be successful. There are many people both in the consumer public and on Wall Street that believe that the competition will be good for the grocery industry.

Amazon entering that mainstream grocery retail space will force other grocery chains to innovate and provide new and better value propositions to their customers. The consumer stands to benefit from that standpoint.

The success of this venture will be evaluated by Amazon in the test markets that they have announced: LA, Chicago, Philadelphia, and others. The full rollout of a new grocery chain from Amazon would help solve for some of the unoccupied retail space in shopping centers around the country. It would bring brick and mortar business back within the context of a changing consumer landscape.

The outcome of this new venture is uncertain, but one thing is clear: all eyes are again on Amazon to see if they can put their stamp on a new way for consumers to shop for groceries.

(Some background information courtesy of Forbes and The Wall Street Journal)

by Frank Maduri

Follow Up: Sears Begins Liquidation Process

The seemingly impending demise of the once dominant American retailer, Sears, took another significant step in that direction on Tuesday. The news media is filled with reports that Sears has rejected a proposal from CEO Eddie Lampert who was attempting to put together an investment proposal through his private equity company to salvage Sears.

The Sears Board of Directors informed the judge overseeing their bankruptcy case that they intend to move forward with the liquidation process. This is the final step taken before a company dissolves, and Sears will now take the necessary steps of liquidating inventory, shutting down stores, and laying off employees.

It is a very sad day for the American retail business landscape because Sears was a huge player for over 100 years (126 years to be exact) and the end of that company and some of the brands associated with it, is an end of an era in retail. The company consolidated with Kmart about 14 years ago and that proved to be one of the key factors in the demise of Sears.

In earlier coverage of this story, I shared how Sears was a store that my parents shopped in frequently for tools and appliances. It is unfortunate that many people thought of Sears for those products, and not for anything more. It also did not help that Sears did not connect with consumers that were not my parents age or older, they lost that next generation of families as well as their children who are now young adults.

The aggressive marketing of Wal-Mart, Target, and Amazon siphoned those customers away from Sears and Kmart ; and neither one could recover from that setback. My local area is a good representation of that effect, the Sears has been there for decades and the Target has been there for less than twenty years. The Target location is consistently crowded, jammed. The Sears has been so empty the last five years that I would drive by and wonder if it was closed.

I read a post on social media earlier that was effectively stating that Sears will cease to exist after 116 years, which is longer than Wal-Mart, Target, and Amazon have been in business combined. The “Amazon effect” is hurting several brick and mortar retailers that have failed to innovate. Sears missed the window to innovate their business model.

Sears should have built up their website and used their physical stores as essentially distribution centers where the customer could come and pick up items, especially expensive items that they would not want shipped. Sears owned so much of the real estate that their physical store locations are located upon that they controlled so much of the costs of not having to lease or rent space from a commercial real estate landlord, that they could have reaped so many benefits from the order online, pick up in store scenario. They did not capitalize on that in a forward-thinking way, by the time they went that direction it was already too late to recover the business.

However, even Jeff Bezos, the CEO of Amazon conceded recently that one day he expects even Amazon to perish, to cease operations. That seems unthinkable to so many, myself included, but his full quote explains further that essentially everything has a shelf life, and at some point Amazon will outlive its usefulness.

Sears managed to cobble together a pretty good run when all things are considered in the retail industry space today. It was such a huge part of Americana, the trips I remember as a kid to Sears to buy a TV, a dishwasher, or going with my Dad to buy tools for a home improvement job. I also recall before I left for college my Mom taking me there to get clothes and lamps to get my dorm room all set up.

Those memories will be all I have as well as others will have left of Sears, it will join the list of retailers and in a similar fashion to Toys R Us, who were crushed by a debt load that was unsustainable. In a similar fashion, an ex-CEO of Toys R Us attempted to save the chain from going under, and was rebuffed by the board and the court in charge of the proceedings.

Eddie Lampert put together a $4.4 billion package to try to save Sears, or at least part of it. The number was deemed to be not adequate enough to effectively salvage the company for a sustained period of time. Lampert will receive criticism for his handling of the last years of the Sears brand. His involvement with a private equity firm has already drawn scrutiny from industry analysts. His next venture remains to be seen, but this loss is going to follow him around for a long time.

My own personal last visit to my local Sears store, which is slated to close very soon, was in mid-November. I went to get work clothes and active wear at greatly reduced discounts. The store was a wreck, and it was sad walking through empty corridors and empty areas of this huge store. The memories came flooding back from my childhood one last time, of days that were easier, simpler times. That is where those memories will stay, like Sears did, frozen in time. A piece of America is gone and is never coming back.

by Frank Maduri

Dr. Pepper Snapple Merger With Keurig – Impact on the Beverage Aisle

The merger of Dr. Pepper Snapple Group with Keurig Green Mountain, which was initially announced in January, was finalized recently. The deal creates the new publicly traded company known as Keurig Dr. Pepper, according to Bev Net is the 3rd largest beverage company in North America.

The merger is going to have a direct impact on the beverage aisle because the combined entity will be utilizing their respective strengths together to create unique delivery systems for the consumer in the future.

The beverage industry is another sector of the economy which is in a “grow or die” phase at this point. In my professional experience in the industry as well as my time covering mergers and acquisitions, the key factor in this segment of business is the distribution network.

That is the main determining factor behind why Coca-Cola and Pepsi dominate the beverage aisle at the grocery store: it is all driven by distribution and shelf space. The smaller brands have a very difficult time competing with the big players in this space because of the costs associated with distributing the product and gaining shelf space for the product.

The executives at the former Dr. Pepper Snapple Group were faced with having to grow in order to compete with the top two players in the industry. The deal with Keurig allows them to do precisely that, it grows their business and their market share.

The deal also includes Allied Brands which is a distribution network that will now be run by the combined Keurig Dr. Pepper which features 125 different brands. This collection of brands are a mix of beverage offerings that are either wholly owned, partially owned, or not owned at all by Keurig Dr. Pepper.

The news over the past five days is about which brands will be dropping out of the new Allied Brands distribution situation. The ripple effect left by these changes will have a definite impact on the beverage industry. Some brands will be promoted on a regional basis in a more visible way.

Conversely, some brands most notably Fiji bottled water will be leaving Allied Brands, according to CNBC, in order to start their own distribution network. The result of these changes will most certainly have a price impact on the consumer, especially if the new or spin-off brands from the Allied distribution network fold into smaller distribution agreements.

The combined strengths of Keurig Dr. Pepper could translate into lower prices or more advantageous bulk sale pricing for the consumer, but that remains to be seen. The single serve delivery system technology that Keurig has mastered could translate into some new concepts that integrate the Snapple iced tea beverage line or create some new innovations on the delivery of Dr. Pepper and its signature flavor.

The merger also helps both entities compete in a grocery channel that is being shaped by Wal-Mart and Amazon/Whole Foods. The persistent pursuit of low prices by Wal-Mart which they require of their suppliers can put the squeeze on profit margins. The combined Keurig Dr. Pepper now has the distribution and production capabilities to compete in a profitable way against the forces of Wal-Mart and Amazon.

It is in this perspective where the consumer will see enhanced value on their favorite soft drinks whether it is Dr. Pepper, 7UP, A&W Root Beer, or Snapple. The distribution of Keurig and their famous pods of all types and varieties and the Green Mountain Coffee products will all see a significant increase into the grocery channel. In addition, perhaps the drug store channel as well given the relationships that Dr. Pepper/Snapple/Allied Brands have developed over decades of time.

The other consideration here is that the combined Keurig Dr. Pepper company can now be an active player in acquisitions which will alter the landscape of the beverage industry. The combined publicly traded entity could target consolidations within the beverage industry, or could seek to enhance their delivery systems or packaging with a purchase of a smaller player in those industry sub-classes.

Keurig Dr. Pepper has a significant positive component working for them in the future: they have a very loyal base of consumers. The consumers in various survey data have identified as “fans” of Keurig and “fans” of Dr. Pepper. The new leadership team of the combined company will utilize new technologies through social media to build deeper relationships with those loyal consumers with cross-branding opportunities to grow revenue further.

The newly combined company features brands that are iconic in America: Dr. Pepper, Snapple, A&W, 7UP, and Sunkist. These brands have multiple products merchandised around them from tee shirts, cups, keychains, and more. They have an identity of their own and this merger promises that these brands will be relevant for a long time to come.

Keurig Dr. Pepper is the largest beverage merger in history and it will dynamically shape the future for the beverage aisle and provide new innovations to the delivery of beverages in an increasingly fast paced way of life for the consumer.

(some background information and industry data courtesy of Bev Net and CNBC)

by Frank Maduri

Follow Up: Toys R Us Buyout Bid From Larian Revisited

The fallout from the liquidation of the iconic toy retailer, Toys R Us, is back in the news cycle. The news about a week ago was that billionaire toy retail brand owner, Isaac Larian, the man behind the Bratz franchise; placed a bid to purchase about 270 stores in the former Toys R Us chain plus their operation in Canada.

The bid was rejected by the courts that oversee the liquidation of the once premiere toy retailer because they deemed the valuation was too low. The court and the management of Toys R Us have an obligation to get the best value for their creditors in selling the business. They deemed that the offer from Larian was not the best value they could obtain at this point.

In the past couple of days, Larian is back in the news stating that he will put another bid into play for the U.S. stores that he has targeted that are viable for his new concept for the rebooted brand.

Larian was outbid for the Canadian operation of Toys R Us by another investment group. His new bid is focused on saving a portion of the U.S. stores, would involve retaining the U.S. corporate headquarters in New Jersey, and would save between 7,000 and 10,000 workers according to CNN Money.

Toys R Us originally had 735 stores and 31,000 workers in the United States and the potential liquidation of the chain is already showing signs of impacting the toy industry in a deleterious manner. Hasbro, according to CNN Money, has just reported a 16% drop in sales based on the absence of Toys R Us from the equation.

Mr. Larian has a theory that the job losses at other toy companies and vendors that marketed products with Toys R Us will be significant if the company is not rebooted in some form. He has a vision for the company where each location will be renovated to be a type of “mini-Disney World” in each neighborhood. The visits to the store will be very experiential for the children and their parents and family members.

This plan may sound great on paper especially because it addresses some of the core issues behind the precipitous decline of Toys R Us; customer feedback in recent years centered on the shopping environment being cold, sterile, and not inviting. The renovation of the stores and the focus shifting to one of experiences and interactivity is necessary to breathe new life into a once prominent brand.

However, that plan will have to overcome some barriers, namely a brand that has been tarnished by underperformance and a liquidation proceeding. It is similar to any brand that struggles or fails the public perception of that brand is very powerful. The public could have made a decision in their mind about Toys R Us based on past experiences which will be difficult for Mr. Larian and his group to overcome.

The perception of the consumer public has doomed many other brands throughout the course of history. In the case of Toys R Us the brand does have value because it is the only retailer which focused solely on toys. The Larian group or whomever gains the winning bid for the brand has to refocus their business around the core niche of toys.

The unfortunate reality is that it is going to take a great deal of time and money to bring back Toys R Us in a form that will be relevant and competitive in today’s consumer marketplace. The competition from Target, Amazon, Wal-Mart, and other online retailers is very fierce. Those are the barriers that any rebooted form of Toys R Us must be ready to contend with in the future.

The demise of Toys R Us was a very sad side effect of a much larger issue that faces retailers today: the consumer today has different expectations from a brick and mortar shopping experience than they did even five years ago. Toys R Us in their original form could not afford to change with the times due to the debt load they were carrying on loans from private equity investors.

The potential for Mr. Larian or the next group to submit a bid to reinvent the brand should have one central theme: they can be the niche “go-to” place for toys. This is an important attribute in an increasing focus on specialization. They can be the experts on toys and the showcase area for people to experience toys. It can still be a place where children can go to dream.

The next few weeks will be critical in the future of the Toys R Us brand in the U.S. and the decisions made will then take several months to determine the progress or the chances of success for the revamped concept. In my own personal view, if the reboot of the store experience fails, I still stand behind the idea that the brand has definite value as an online only presence. This is substantiated by the visibility and nostalgia components of the brand and the connectedness with a variety of age demographics.

This is just another chapter in what could be a long story: whether it will be one of redemption is what time will reveal.

by Frank Maduri

The Inevitable Demise of An American Icon: Sears

Sears has been in the news again this week with news regarding the potential sale of one of their iconic brands. I wrote a post for another site a few months ago when Sears first decided to put three of their mainstay brands up for sale: Craftsman tools, Kenmore, and Die Hard. This is most certainly an effort to increase cash flow through both the sale of the brands and through the almost certain jump in Sears stock as a result.

The news that an as yet unnamed bidder (rumor has it the bidder is Black & Decker) is interested in paying a significant amount of money for the Craftsman name with some estimates in the $2 billion range; has Sears stock trading at an increased level in the past two days. Craftsman is a symbol of uncompromising quality in tools and related hardware products that is well established in the consumer marketplace.

The unfortunate other side to this transaction is that many industry experts and financial market insiders with great knowledge of the situation indicate that even if Sears divests Craftsman in this deal, the cash flow is not enough to make a reversal of the outlook for the company.

In fact, those same experts as well as some other reports I reviewed state that even if Sears sold all three of those brands at a premium it still would not help their cause. This is where the Sears merger and acquisition of Kmart stores again looms large in the negative outlook for the company.

In my understanding of the situation having covered this as well as other failing retail brands in the past is this: essentially while the sale of the brand, in this case it is Craftsman, may help Sears in the short term; Sears will lose the profit generated by the sale of those branded products which it currently owns outright.

The mere fact that Sears put these three well established brands on the block to be sold is (if some of you remember my previous work on this subject) an indication that the times are desperate there. It is an indication that the company is definitely preparing for “reorganization” (i.e. bankruptcy) in the near future.

Sears also owns a great deal of real estate between the buildings of their brick and mortar retail stores and the land that those stores are situated on which contributes to their profit and loss situation. It is expensive to maintain both buildings and land, so Sears has either been divesting itself of one or both, as well as determining some other methods of cost reducing those components of their business model.

A couple of prime examples of these strategies are right in my backyard in New Jersey. Sears owns the building that is home to their Freehold Raceway Mall location, in order to control some of the costs the company consolidated their inventory from multiple levels of the store onto one level. They subsequently rented out the other two levels to an Ireland based company called Primark, a retailer of discounted products, mostly clothing brands.

In Middletown, the Sears location and the large piece of land it sits upon was sold to Investors Bank. The bank is now constructing a new branch location at that site, and most certainly has some kind of long range plan for the development of that land in the future. Most retail and financial market experts put the time frame for the bankruptcy and demise of Sears at 18 to 24 months from now.

It still boggles my mind that Sears, such an iconic retailer will cease to exist in potentially that short a period of time. I always think of those employees who will be out of work, some of whom have undoubtedly served the company for many years. These same workers have a set of skills and experience in the retail field which is shrinking and may have a difficult time finding new employment.

Conversely, Sears could not seem to get it right, they were missing that connection with the consumer. They were the retailer that was an afterthought in the minds of the average consumer. Sears is thought of as a place where you get tools or tires or a dishwasher; and not where you would get a television, a jacket, or a pair of sneakers. They could not seem to connect the value of their full complement of products to the consumer in the way that Wal-Mart and Target most certainly have accomplished.

The management at Sears keeps telling Wall Street that they are in the middle of a “turnaround” but that has not seemed to materialize. I liken it to the professional sports team that is in seemingly a constant rebuilding mode and never seems to turn that corner where the results manifest themselves tangibly.

Sears CEO, Eddie Lampert, has stated again this week that the company will not close down the Kmart division of the business, which is seen as an anchor around the neck of the entire business operation. They will continue to close Kmart stores that are “underperforming” as they recently closed my local Kmart here in New Jersey. They will not shutter the entire division. I think that this is a mistake and that there is a point where you have to start bailing the water out of the ship before it sinks further.

The business model for Sears in this turnaround phase is a case of “too little, too late” as the saying goes. The damage has already been done. The executive team is now focusing on selling off the brands that are most profitable, closing down lapsed consumer credit lines, and whittling down their overhead costs through the sale of real estate holdings or through sublet type agreements as I mentioned similar to the location in Freehold.
Those are all signs that the executives are trying to maintain what little profitability remains in the business. Therefore they can divide up those revenues when it comes time for them to take the “golden parachute” ride before the operation shutters the doors for good.

The demise of Sears is inevitable it seems, and it is sad because I am sure that most of us at a certain age have memories of shopping there, or of our parents bringing home a picture of the new Kenmore refrigerator. I remember going in the garage and seeing all of my father’s Craftsman tools or getting a Die Hard battery for one of the cars during a harsh winter. My mother would take me to Sears to get clothes for an athletic team I had joined.

All of those instances and so many more will remain memories that other generations of American children will never have. That is due to poor business decisions by Sears, marketing campaigns that consistently missed the target, and the societal shift towards online shopping and away from traditional retailers. It is a scenario where it is essentially “adapt or fail” and Sears failed to adapt in time to save an iconic American retail brand from joining the long list of other retailers who no longer exist. It is a sad trend overall, but one that is a harsh new reality.