Fast fashion players such as M&S, Zara, H&M see fall in sales growth on spending woes

admin

December 14, 2024

Sagar Malviya, Economic Times
Mumbai, 14 December 2024

Fast fashion was on a slow lane in the last fiscal year. Sales growth slowed for top retailers and fast fashion brands, show the latest regulatory filings of Marks & Spencer, Zara, H&M, Levi’s, Lifestyle, Uniqlo, Benetton and Celio. The bottom line too had taken a hit, with most brands posting lower profits in the fiscal year ended March 31. Sales growth of H&M and Zara fell from 40% in FY23 to 11% and 8% in FY24, show the filings with the Registrar of Companies. Levi’s growth slowed to 4% from 54% in FY23, while that of Uniqlo halved to 31% from 60%.

The current year is not looking good either, as sticky inflation and stagnant income weigh on consumer spending on discretionary products, say experts.

Devangshu Dutta, founder of retail consulting firm Third Eyesight, said the job market has been under pressure and slower income growth for urban consumer impacted demand, a trend likely to continue even during FY25.

“There is a visible slowdown led by the urban middle class who buy branded products. These brands have been targeting young upwardly mobile consumers, who are tightening the purse strings due to the current economic circumstances of hiring slack and fewer jobs,” said Dutta. “The situation is not hunky-dory at all, and this will continue over the next few quarters.”

Being the world’s most populous country, India is an attractive market for apparel brands, especially with youngsters increasingly embracing western-style clothing. But most international and premium brands have been competing for a relatively narrow slice of the population pie in large urban centres.

Over the past few years, top global apparel and fast fashion brands struck a strong chord with young customers, racking up sales growth of between 40% and 60% in FY23, bucking the trend in a market where the overall demand for discretionary products started slowing down. This has reversed now.

Consumers started reducing non-essential spending, such as on apparel, lifestyle products, electronics and dining out since early last year due to high inflation, increase in interest rates, job losses in sectors like startups and IT, and an overall slowdown in the economy.

According to the Retailers Association of India (RAI), sales growth in organised retail segments such as apparel, footwear, beauty and quick service restaurants halved to 9% last year and slowed further to about 5% in the first six months in the current fiscal year. This slowdown came after a surge in spending across segments-from clothes to cars-in the post-pandemic period, triggered by revenge shopping.

“The base post-pandemic was extremely high, and that kind of growth is not sustainable as there is nothing spectacular in economy to drive demand,” said Kumar Rajagopalan, chief executive officer at the RAI that represents organised retailers. “Our bet was on the festive and wedding season, but we will have to wait and watch until next year for the performance numbers,” he said.

(Published in Economic Times)

Fight for 6E is giving Mahindra vehicle free publicity, say brand experts

admin

December 8, 2024

Sharleen Dsouza, Business Standard
Mumbai, 8 Dec 2024

The legal battle between Mahindra Electric Automobile and IndiGo Aviation over ‘6e’ continues in court, and brand experts believe the case is unlikely to stand up in law. However, Mahindra is receiving free publicity from this trademark infringement fight.

As the case progresses in the Delhi High Court (HC), Mahindra issued a statement on Saturday, saying, “We are hence taking the decision to brand our product BE 6.”

However, brand experts argue that since both companies operate in different sectors, there should not be any legal issues.

“Ideally, there shouldn’t be confusion, as they don’t operate in the same segment unless IndiGo plans to enter the car market, and vice versa. Everyone is being cautious about their brand,” said N Chandramouli, chief executive officer (CEO) of TRA Research.

He added that while everyone is being cautious about their brand, the use of ‘6e’ by Mahindra is not necessarily against the law. “It depends on what the court decides, and Mahindra Electric Automobile can prove in court that it will not harm its brand name.”

Devangshu Dutta, CEO of Third Eyesight, also said that there are several instances where brands and trademarks overlap. “From a marketing perspective, Mahindra Electric Automobile is getting free publicity from this fight. IndiGo’s position in this argument will depend on whether it has registered ‘6e’ as a trademark.”

Sandeep Goyal, chairman of Rediffusion, believes this is an interesting case. He said, “I’m not sure if ‘6e’ as a combination is registrable. However, IndiGo may well have secured the intellectual property (IP), though the trademark may not extend to automobiles.” He further added, “I’m sure Mahindra must have done its homework before using 6e in its vehicle name — it’s too public to risk unless it was unfettered and cleared by their lawyers.”

In its statement released on Saturday, Mahindra also said it has applied for trademark registration under Class 12 (vehicles) for ‘BE 6e’ as part of its electric sport utility vehicle portfolio. “The mark ‘BE’ is already registered with Mahindra in Class 12, and it stands for our Born Electric platform underpinning the BE 6e.”

“We believe it differs fundamentally from IndiGo’s ‘6e’, which represents an airline, eliminating any risk of confusion,” it added.

The statement also noted that, in the past, Tata Motors had objected to InterGlobe Enterprises using the IndiGo mark due to the Tata Indigo car brand. InterGlobe continues to use the IndiGo mark in a different industry. “We, therefore, find their objection to BE 6e inconsistent with its own previous conduct,” the statement said.

Last week, IndiGo released a statement saying that the ‘6e’ mark has been an integral part of IndiGo’s identity for the past 18 years and is a registered trademark with strong global recognition. “The ‘6e’ mark, whether standalone or in its variants and formative forms, is extensively used by IndiGo for its offerings and goods and services provided in collaboration with trusted partners.”

It added that any unauthorised use of the ‘6e’ mark, whether standalone or in any form, constitutes an infringement of IndiGo’s rights, reputation, and goodwill. “IndiGo is committed to taking all necessary and appropriate steps to safeguard its IP and brand identity,” the statement said.

The case will be heard in the Delhi HC on Monday.

(Published in Business Standard)

Top sportswear companies’ growth run slows after Covid highs

admin

December 4, 2024

Sagar Malviya, Economic Times

4 December 2024

Demand for sportswear from running shoes to joggers and yoga mats slowed down for leading firms such as Puma, Adidas, Nike, Skechers and Asics, halting their sprint since the easing of the Covid-19 pandemic when they doubled their sales in two years.

Sportswear firms have reported 1-25% year-on-year increase for 2023-24, down from 35-85% increase for the previous financial year, according to the latest regulatory filings. While demand for fitness wear and sports equipment for disciplines other than cricket grew as people prioritised health with the onset of Covid-19, consumers cut back on discretionary spends across categories over the past six to eight quarters.

Experts said companies capitalised on the popularity of more casual styles in the wake of the pandemic, a trend that has subsided now although people are more health conscious than ever. A broader slowdown, especially in cities, hurt premium categories including sportswear, which are completely dominated by global players.

“Sportswear or footwear has a slower replacement cycle than apparel and lifestyle products. Also, there is a distinct slowdown as it all comes down to income growth versus inflation. So, a longer term potential still remains for the segment but there is a short-term consumption stress,” said Devangshu Dutta, founder of retail consulting firm Third Eyesight.

With a population of 1.4 billion, India is among the fastest growing and largest international markets for footwear companies and over the years companies such as Under Armour, Asics and Skechers have expanded aggressively in the country.

Puma India managing director Karthik Balagopalan said the category has outpaced market growth with mid to high single digit growth rates even as subdued demand has lagged expectations.

“When it comes to health and fitness, consumers continue to spend on performance products and our sports-first strategy also leans towards that. Our ambition continues to grow at or be above market CAGR (compound annual growth rate) over the mid-term, and we think we are in a good place with our back-end infrastructure, our product portfolio and pipeline, BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards) readiness and our best-in-class team, who will continue to cement and retain our lead on competition,” he said.

In October, Foot Locker entered India through a long-term licensing agreement with Metro Brands, which will own and operate stores, while Nykaa Fashion will be its exclusive e-commerce partner.

However, there are challenges. In August this year, the government made it mandatory for footwear companies to obtain BIS certification for more than a dozen footwear products including sports brands. This impacted sales even last year as BIS had not issued licences to several foreign brands whose products were manufactured outside India, which in turn, forced brands to cut down on supplies.

American footwear firm Skechers said in its last earnings call that it had been growing exceptionally well in India for several years but there was a bit of an anomaly in part because of some of the regulatory changes that it had not yet fully responded to.

“We continue to work closely with both our India team and regulators to further advance our local sourcing strategy. We are seeing positive trends and remain optimistic about the progress in this important market. We see tremendous opportunity, not only in our lifestyle business, but also in performance,” Skechers chief operating officer David Weinberg told analysts.

(Published in Economic Times)

Reliance-fuelled Campa’s rise has cola makers splurging on marketing

admin

October 28, 2024

Nisha Qureshi, Afaqs
28 Oct 2024

Reliance Industries last year made a strategic move into the soft drink sector by acquiring the iconic carbonated beverage brand ‘Campa Cola,’ which gained prominence in the 80s and 90s.

The conglomerate intends to strengthen its brand by employing its classic pricing disruption strategy. Reliance is expanding its presence nationwide by focussing on affluent regions and utilising e-commerce and quick commerce platforms.

Recent reports suggest that Campa Cola is providing retailers with more favourable trade margins than its rivals Coca Cola and Pepsi, aiming to challenge the existing duopoly in India’s soft drink market.

In the Q2FY25 earnings call, Reliance Industries reported that its consumer brands, particularly Campa Cola and Independence, are experiencing robust growth, with general trade increasing by 250% year-on-year.

“We are taking several marketing initiatives to grow consumer brands and will leverage the festive period to drive demand,” the company’s representative said during the call, adding that the company was “very optimistic about the next few quarters”.

Experts now believe that the soft-drink beverage market will witness an increase in advertising initiatives by the competitors to mitigate the disruption.

Saurabh Munjal, co-founder and CEO of Archian Foods, the makers of Lahori Zeera, asserts that Reliance’s entry into this sector will only expand the market for soft-drink beverages.

“The consumption will increase, accompanied by a corresponding rise in marketing efforts,” he adds.

Devangshu Dutta, the founder of Third Eyesight, a management consulting firm engaged with the retail and consumer products ecosystem, asserts that both Coca-Cola and Pepsi will undoubtedly endeavour to safeguard their market share.

He says the emphasis will particularly be on domestic consumption, and we can anticipate an increased investment in share-of-mind campaigns to proactively counter Campa’s expansion.

Business strategist and independent director Lloyd Mathias believes that the current circumstances are conducive to market expansion and disruption. “Other players will likewise increase their visibility through marketing strategies and retail initiatives to counter this. So what we will see in the next year is that the categories of soft drinks will grow quite dramatically,” he adds.

The classic Reliance move

Experts suggest that Reliance’s approach to Campa Cola involves competitive pricing, reflecting a strategy akin to its disruptive tactics in the telecom sector with Jio and JioCinema. For instance, a two-litre bottle of Campa Cola’s lemon flavour is priced at Rs 53 on a quick commerce platform, whereas a leading competitor offers it for Rs 74.

Besides competitive pricing, Reliance also has the significant advantage of owning a large retail and media network to scale Campa Cola.

“Reliance has earlier disrupted markets with the aggressive pricing strategy and it has the resources to follow-through on its pricing strategy for Campa as well. It can build significant volumes across its own stores prior to having to compete for shelf space in the broader distribution channels,” says Dutta.

As per Mathias, in addition to possessing deep pockets, Reliance benefits from its extensive media and entertainment wing that will be leveraged for the promotion of Campa Cola.

“I think the combined strength of Reliance in terms of distribution, media, and retail, alongside its capacity to maintain pricing integrity, are quite formidable. I think they are going to make a significant impact in the market,” says Mathias.

Impact on smaller players

Experts also suggest that the introduction of Campa Cola at its current price point will primarily affect smaller local competitors who function within the same pricing bracket, particularly in tier-2 and tier-3 markets.

Mathias asserts that Campa Cola will initially expand the soft-drink beverage market, while also emphasising that given the price point of the soft drink, the immediate impact will be felt by smaller local players who operate at similar price points. Introduction of numerous Indian innovations within the soft-drink category could significantly impact relatively smaller competitors.

Similarly, Dutta observes that the market for carbonated beverages largely hinges on the intangible qualities associated with the brands. In India, however, brand preferences are not as hard coded as they are in the United States.

“Consumers do switch between brands, and price-sensitive customers can be swayed by visible pricing differences. This gives deep-pocketed Reliance an opportunity to carve out a significant market share.”

However, according to Munjial of Lahori Zeera, there appears to be no direct impact on his brand, given that Campa Cola has thus far only introduced the well-known flavours of carbonated beverages. “As far as Lahori Zeera is concerned, there is no impact because the target consumer, the flavours are all very different.”

“This development will merely add to the market and increase the number of people consuming carbonated beverages,” he says.

(Published in Afaqs)

Inside the lucrative world of soft-drink bottling

admin

September 16, 2024

Priyamvada C., Mint

16 September 2024

When the late George Fernandes, the industries minister in the short-lived Janata Party government of 1977, issued a diktat to multinational corporations Coca-Cola, IBM and AstraZeneca to dilute their stake in their wholly owned subsidiaries to 40% in favour of Indian shareholders, Coca-Cola and IBM chose to exit India. Later, during P V Narasimha Rao’s proliberalisation government in 1993, Coca-Cola returned. It bought out Ramesh Chauhan’s Delhi Bottling Company and Coolaid, the bottling companies of five carbonated drinks, in 1998.

With Coca-Cola India now said to be evaluating options to list its wholly owned bottling subsidiary – Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages (HCCB), Mint explains the rationale behind companies considering such moves.

What caused the change in strategy?

Experts said there is a trend of consumer giants spinning off their units to optimise their balance sheets, go asset-light and focus on their core brands and business models. Coca-Cola India’s ambitions to list HCCB come almost a decade after rival PepsiCo’s bottler, Varun Beverages, listed on the local stock exchanges, yielding significant value for the Jaipuria family.

Unlike PepsiCo, Coca-Cola owns its bottling franchise, just as other MNCs including consumer goods major Whirlpool, ball-bearing specialist Timken, and tobacco giant BAT, who are keen to take advantage of the valuations that Indian investors give to well-run MNCs. Varun Beverages commands a market valuation of ₹2.09 trillion. Hindustan Unilever and Colgate-Palmolive (India) are examples of multinational companies that have listed in India.

Coca-Cola’s move is seen as a strategic attempt to yield significant benefits, including financial gains, risk mitigation and other exit opportunities. The Economic Times was the first to report on HCCB’s listing plans in May.

How does the parent company benefit?

Through such moves, the parent company can reduce exposure to risks associated with bottling companies, which include fluctuations pertaining to raw material, regulatory changes and local market conditions, said Alpana Srivastava, a partner at Desai & Diwanji. While spinning off bottling subsidiaries is more prevalent in the beverage industry, she said other fast-moving consumer goods and retail companies may explore similar strategies to optimise their balance sheets in the current environment.

Earlier this year, HCCB announced the transfer of its bottling operations in three territories in north India to streamline supply chains in the region. However, the bottler declined to comment on its IPO plans.

As part of the transition, the Rajasthan market will be owned and operated by Kandhari Global Beverages, which operates in parts of Delhi, Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, Punjab, Chandigarh, Jammu & Kashmir, and Ladakh.

The Bihar market will be owned and operated by SLMG Beverages Pvt Ltd, which runs bottling operations in Uttarakhand, parts of Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Bihar. The Northeast market and select areas of West Bengal will be owned and operated by Moon Beverages Pvt Ltd, which operates in parts of Delhi and Uttar Pradesh.

What other factors motivate such spin-offs?

Besides providing liquidity for the bottler, listing may offer tax benefits such as reduced capital gains tax or more favourable transfer pricing rules and optimise the overall tax burden for both the parent company and the subsidiary, Srivastava explained. It may allow both entities to be valued more accurately based on their individual capacities in growth, risk profiles and capital intensity.

This comes in the backdrop of companies looking to make the most of a bullish stock market to unlock more value for shareholders by listing their manufacturing subsidiaries. It enables the companies to raise more capital, which can be used to strengthen their market presence and reduce debt, said Devangshu Dutta, founder of Third Eyesight, a management consulting firm. He said the core value generator for companies such as Coca-Cola and Pepsi are brands and marketing rather than manufacturing.

In April, private equity firm Lighthouse Funds invested ₹700 crore in Parsons Nutritionals, a contract manufacturer specialising in packaged foods, beverages, and personal care products, underlining investor appetite in this sector. Other co-investors include the International Finance Corporation, a member of the World Bank Group, Evolvence India, HDFC AMC’s Fund of Funds, and various family offices.

However, there may be legal considerations, too. While exclusive contracts exist, the bottler may have partnerships with other companies in its distribution portfolio, which may have to be reviewed and renegotiated. There may be regulatory compliance and other anticompetitive considerations when it involves such big entities.

Other instances of such moves

While there are fewer examples of bottling companies listed in India, this practice is more common globally. Coca-Cola has listed most of its bottling subsidiaries in other global markets such as North America and Europe.

While there is no shareholding between PepsiCo and Varun Beverages, there is an exclusive arrangement for Varun Beverages to bottle, use trademarks, distribute, market, and sell PepsiCo products across India. The beverage giant benefits from royalty and licence fees. Over the past year, Varun Beverages’ revenue rose 22% to ₹16,400 crore while its profit increased to ₹2,056 crore from ₹1,497 crore in FY22. As of Friday’s close, the bottler’s shares had gained almost 30% to ₹645.20 since the beginning of this year.

Any potential listing opportunity for HCCB may allow a staggered exit for Coca-Cola India from managing local operations, monetising its stake and participating in future licence fees and/or royalty arrangements, said Dhruv Chatterjee, a partner at Saraf and Partners. He added that there are indications in the retail and fast-moving consumer goods category of similar divestments. Coca-Cola India did not respond to Mint’s request for comment.

Ravikumar Distilleries is an example of a listed manufacturing company that has tie-ups with liquor companies Radico Khaitan, Shashi Distilleries and John Distilleries, in addition to manufacturing and marketing its own liquor products. Bengal Beverages is an unlisted bottler that manufactures and distributes non-alcoholic beverage brands under licence from Coca-Cola across categories such as sparkling soft drinks, juice and water.

What kind of contracts exist between the bottler and the parent company?

Many bottling plants are usually set up by companies as a joint venture with a local partner. The bottler procures the concentrate from the companies. About 14-15% of the concentrate cost goes to the bottler, which translates into revenue for the brand, according to a person familiar with such discussions who spoke on condition of anonymity. The company spends a part of this revenue on marketing activities that target mass audiences through television, radio and newspapers.

Depending on the terms of the contract, the bottler may be expected to spend a portion of its revenue on marketing through outdoor settings such as billboards, flyers, social media and events. The arrangement between a bottler and a company may be either a pure bottling arrangement (or contract manufacturing) or a bottling and distribution arrangement, where the bottler is also responsible for marketing, branding, and last-mile distribution.

How has the carbonated beverage market fared?

Market research provider Statista estimated that the carbonated drink market in India clocks about $2.4 billion in revenue and is expected to grow by 6.98% annually over the next four years. The volume consumed at home and other outdoor locations is likely about 4.2 billion litres this year.

In 2022, Parle Agro’s brand Appy Fizz and Coca Cola dominated with a 31% market share each, followed by Fanta, Pepsi, 7UP and Sprite, among others. Other brands such as Reliance-backed Campa Cola are expected to challenge the dominance of these companies.

Before Reliance acquired Campa for ₹22 crore in 2022, the soft drink had been launched by Pure Drinks Group in the 1970s. The group was behind the launch and distribution of Coca-Cola in 1949, before the US company was shunted out of the country in 1977.

Pure Drinks and Campa Beverages subsequently launched Campa Cola to fill the gap left by foreign soft drink companies in the country. However, Coca-Cola and PepsiCo re-entered the Indian market in the 1990s, throttling local competition.

(Published in Mint)