Can Retail Make Room For Showrooming?

Retail stores have had to deal with an increasing threat to their sales as smartphone ownership has crossed 50% and more consumers are using stores as a “showroom” before buying goods online. This especially became a problem for retailer Target when Amazon offered a 5% discount to anyone who used their Price Check app to scan a bar code of an item in a store and then bought it from the website. As a result, Target dropped Kindle from shelves saying, “What we aren’t willing to do is let online-only retailers use our brick-and-mortar stores as a showroom for their products and undercut our prices.” Not too long after Walmart followed suit by dropping Kindles from their stores.

How big is this problem? A recent survey says 50% of respondents with smartphones research prices while in store, 1 in 3 who research prices leave and buy from a competitor, and 96% plan to “showroom” in the future.

So what can retailers do? An article in Forbes suggests three strategies:
1. Begin a strategic conversation between brands and retailers. Through dual distribution or multichannel marketing they often end up competing against each other. Big retailers such as Best Buy need to develop exclusives to keep customers coming and buying. Tom Van Riper from Forbes said this is how Barnes & Noble kept Amazon from closing their business by developing the Nook.
2. Embrace customization as a key area of strategic growth. Large shoe brands such as Reebok and Nike are seeing revenue numbers in the $100 million range with their custom shoe programs.
3. Focus on the customer experience. Forrester research says 35% of shoppers want to purchase custom products to stand out from their peers. But also consider custom buying experiences for long term loyalty and engagement.

Mashable suggests innovation as another way to battle showrooming and talks about a store in Australia which started charging consumers $5 just to walk into the store. Before you start a retail cover charge also consider new digital marketing services that engage shoppers to entice them to stores. For example, Target has announced plans to price-match online competitors, such as Amazon. And Brian Gillespie, principal at a service design firm, suggests encouraging “webrooming” (the opposite of showrooming) where shoppers search for products they want online, and then head into the store to make a purchase.

Gillespie makes a good point. It comes down to retailers creating an in-store experience exceptional enough to keep consumers purchasing in-store. The kind of customer service Nordstrom offers and enhanced with digital environments. But will that kind of service draw a crowd for toilet paper at Target the same way it does for Eau de toilette at Nordstrom?

Brand Equity: Tangible Assets Are A Small Part Today’s Brand Value

According to Interbrand Corporation’s Best Global Brands Ranking the value of Microsoft brand was $60.8 billion in 2010. How can the Microsoft brand be worth so much?

Lets start by figuring out what that number means. In the past, one of the undervalued assets of companies was their brand, because they are off-balance-sheet items. Haigh & Knowles, (2004) tell us that today, looking at a typical company like Microsoft, net tangible assets make a small percentage of total value. When comparing brand value to percentage of market capitalization we find that, based on the 2005 Interbrand study, Microsoft’s brand value was $59.9 billion compared to a market capitalization of only $13.2 billion.

So why does the Microsoft brand contribute so much to its value? There has been this value shift from tangible to intangible assets. The tangible assets of Microsoft including land, equipment, inventory, networking, only account for roughly 22% of its value. Especially in a software company like Microsoft, its real value comes in its intangible assets such as patents, distribution rights, customer data bases, brands/sub-brands, and the quality of their workforce and management. Intellectual property rights, trademarks, trade names, patents, and designs protect these intangibles and help make a brand a valuable asset.

Brands like Microsoft establish a level of quality and performance in the minds of individuals and businesses. These satisfied buyers choose to buy the product again. The brand loyalty represents predictability and security for demand. It also makes it very difficult for competitors to enter the market. As the old saying goes, “No one ever got fired for buying IBM.” All the years of marketing and product experience have helped secure a competitive advantage for Microsoft. That’s why there is such a price premium paid for companies like Microsoft. Imagine trying to build a Microsoft from scratch? Even if you were given the 22% in tangibles of equipment and other assets it would be a difficult task. In creating a new software company from scratch that 78% is a high hill to get over.

A good example of how the power and value of Microsoft’s brand created competitive advantage was back in the late 1990’s. Netscape tried to compete with Microsoft by getting into the Internet browser arena quickly while Microsoft underestimated its popularity and potential.

Discovering it made a mistake as Netscape gained prominence, Microsoft used its brand power to squelch Netscape’s threat to its desktop software dominance by pressuring its distributors (PC manufactures) to restrict the distribution and usage of Netscape’s browser. Today Wal-Mart uses its brand power to negotiate, or as some would say demand, lower prices from its supplier.

Do you think the rise of store brands lowered brand value in package goods?