admin
November 1, 2021
Written By Vaishnavi Gupta
D2C brands are taking the traditional retail route to scale up
Analysts say that the move to offline retail makes sense for digital-first brands in categories where experiencing the product is an important driver for purchase
While brands across categories made a beeline for e-commerce during the pandemic, physical retail earned prominence among direct-to-consumer (D2C) brands. Melorra, Plum, Pee Safe and Libas, among others, have been building their offline presence over the past year.
The total retail market in India is estimated to be worth Rs 63 lakh crore, of which 95% buying happens through offline formats, according to Devangshu Dutta, founder, Third Eyesight.
Having started as an online-only brand in 2013, Pee Safe launched its first exclusive store in India in February, 2021. The personal hygiene brand currently operates a store each in Gurugram, Bengaluru and Ahmedabad; and plans to launch 50 offline stores in the next 12 months. “There is a strong demand for personal hygiene and wellness products in the offline market. Hence, opening exclusive outlets is a crucial element of our growth strategy,” says Srijana Bagaria, co-founder and director, Pee Safe. These exclusive brand outlets (EBOs) will be launched through the franchise-owned and franchise-operated (FOFO) model.
Online ethnic wear brand Libas, meanwhile, unveiled two brick-and-mortar stores in New Delhi in September, 2021. The brand has an ambitious target of 200 more stores by 2025 in malls and high streets across metro and tier II cities. A click-and-collect facility will be operational soon, says Sidhant Keshwani, managing director, Libas. “We are aiming for our offline market share to be 25% in the coming two years,” he adds.
The brand offers a range of wedding and occasion wear, as well as ready-to-stitch fabrics exclusively in its offline stores. Soon, it also plans to foray into the kidswear and menswear categories, as well as home décor.
Beauty brand Plum, which has been retailing online since 2014, launched its first store in Mumbai in October, 2021. Plum’s founder and CEO, Shankar Prasad, says the goal is to take the store count to 50 by 2023, and for EBOs to contribute “10-20% of our total sales in two-three years”.
Jewellery brand Melorra extended its presence offline back in December, 2020. “We have been growing 200% year-on-year; we expect to post even stronger numbers this year with the addition of offline stores. We are looking to touch $1 billion in revenue in five years,” says the company’s founder and CEO, Saroja Yeramilli.
A good step?
Analysts say that the move to offline retail makes sense for digital-first brands in categories where experiencing the product is an important driver for purchase. “D2C players have so far done a great job of owning the consumer journey which is largely online. They now see that for the next wave of growth and penetration, they need good representation in a larger set of touchpoints,” says Rachit Mathur, partner and MD, BCG.
However, online is likely to remain the primary revenue stream for these digital-first brands. “Brands such as Lenskart, Nykaa and FirstCry have done a great job in driving strong retail presence and viable productivity, but continue to have a higher bias of online sales,” Mathur notes.
D2C brands could perhaps try a mix of formats for an offline foray, from EBOs to a presence in departmental stores, or even small SIS (shop-in-shop) counters in shopping centres. But brands would need to be cognisant of the fact that consumers behave differently depending on the shopping environment they are in. Hence, the interface, service offering, and even the product mix may have to be tweaked. “Simply bringing in technology into an offline environment just because you are an online-first brand may do nothing to enhance the consumer experience, and may even detract from it,” Dutta says.
Source: financialexpress
admin
June 29, 2021
Devika Singh, Moneycontrol
29 June 2021
Post-COVID, the sanitiser market will shrink considerably and there will be room only for old trusted brands or bulk low margin suppliers, suggest experts.
Every one in two urban households are now using sanitisers, as per data from Kantar.
The pandemic has triggered a gold rush in the health and hygiene sector, particularly sanitisers – even if temporarily.
A severely underpenetrated category in the pre-pandemic period, sanitisers have witnessed massive adoption amongst the consumers since March 2020.
According to data from Kantar, annually, before the pandemic struck (March 2019 – February 2020) hand sanitiser penetration was about 1.2 percent; on an average in a month only 0.1 percent of the urban households bought the product.
However, during the first 12 months of the pandemic, the category reached nearly 50 percent penetration, a quantum leap.
It means everyone in two urban households are now using sanitisers, as per data from Kantar, the world’s leading data, insights, and consulting company.
Overall, the hygiene category had witnessed a huge spike in sales as the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic struck the country in March last year.
Although the sales declined as the cases subsided, the demand jumped up again with the second wave of the pandemic.
Several companies had made a beeline for the category and joined the sanitiser gold rush.
According to data from Kantar, as many as 350 brands of sanitisers were launched in the first three months of the pandemic.
Consumers are also buying more products in the hygiene category such as vegetable cleaners and surface disinfectants.
Data from Kantar shows that vegetable and fruit cleaners now have a penetration of 2 percent and surface disinfectants 1.5 percent.
“For a category that is driven by a limited number of brands and has not even been there for a year, it is a huge success,” said K Ramakrishnan, MD – South Asia, Worldpanel Division, Kantar.
Though the category overall has seen an increase in demand, industry and experts expect only a few big brands with a strong legacy in the hygiene segment to sustain in the long run.
Hence companies such as Marico have already started deprioritising the category.
“Of late, we have realised that it (sanitisers) is more of a tactical opportunity for us to provide consumers what they needed then,” Pawan Agrawal, CFO, Marico, said.
“These products do not fit into our scheme of things as we understood that consumers will go back to the legacy brands with strong equity in hygiene, and hence three-four brands will have a larger play in the segment,” he added.
Marico, hence, has decided to not make any fresh investments in the category going ahead.
Raymond Consumer Care, which sells sanitisers under its brand Park Avenue, too, has similar plans.
“We believe post-COVID, the sanitiser market will shrink considerably and there will be room only for old trusted brands or bulk low margin suppliers. Given this context, we will maintain strategic presence in the chemist channel, but this segment will not be a priority,” admitted Sudhir Langer, CEO – Raymond Consumer Care.
Other companies such as CavinKare plan to focus on flagship products such as handwashes.
Said Raja Varatharaju, GM Marketing – Personal Care, CavinKare: “As the demand for sanitisers continues to slow down, our core focus will remain on offering a bouquet of products under the health and hygiene portfolio as we move forward. We will increase and strengthen our focus on hand wash, as it is a flagship product in our portfolio.”
Reckitt’s Dettol, ITCs’ Savlon and Hindustan Unilever Limited’s (HUL) Lifebuoy are some of the top brands in the health and hygiene space, which are likely to benefit from this trend in the long run, indicate experts.
Consumers associate certain products and categories with certain brands and are inclined to buy from them, said Devangshu Dutta, Chief Executive at retail consultancy, Third Eyesight.
Hence, companies, which saw in the pandemic the chance to tap the short-term opportunity, do not want to focus on it any longer.
Source: moneycontrol
admin
June 1, 2021
Written By DEVIKA SINGH
The FMCG major in a presentation circulated internally has acknowledged that more than 60 percent of its products do not meet recognised definition of health.
NESTLE USA – entrance to headquarters building with sign (Source: ShutterStock) Nestle
The spectre of ‘unhealthy foods’ is back to haunt Nestle again, this time globally. One of the largest food companies in the world and the maker of popular brands in India such as Maggi and KitKat has been cast in a negative light after (inadvertently) admitting that it has a large share of ‘unhealthy products’ in its portfolio.
If you are wondering what the fuss is about, here are answers to five big questions on the episode, including the potential implication on the company’s Indian unit.
What is the row all about?
Nestle in a document circulated internally has acknowledged that more than 60 percent of its products do not meet the “recognised definition of health” and that some of its products “will never be healthy no matter how much the company renovates,” reported the Financial Times.
According to the UK-based newspaper, the presentation was circulated internally among the company’s top executives earlier this year and said only 37 percent of Nestle’s food and beverages by revenues, excluding products such as pet food and specialised medical nutrition, achieve a rating above 3.5 under Australia’s health star rating system.
Even within its overall food and drink portfolio, about 70 percent of food products failed to meet that threshold, along with 96 percent of beverages — excluding pure coffee — and 99 percent of confectionery and ice cream portfolio, as per the report.
The rating system is used in research by international groups such as the Access to Nutrition Foundation.
Ouch! What does Nestle have to say about this revelation?
After the report surfaced, Nestle S.A released a statement saying that it is working on a company-wide project to update nutrition and health strategy.
“We are looking at our entire portfolio across the different phases of people’s lives to ensure our products are helping meet their nutritional needs and supporting a balanced diet,” said a Nestle S.A spokesperson.
The company in its statement cited its efforts to improve the nutritional footprint of its products. “For example, we have reduced the sugar and sodium in our products significantly in the past two decades, about 14-15 percent in the past 7 years alone.”
However, it also specified that external nutrition profiling systems like the Health Star Rating and Nutri-Score don’t capture Nestle’s entire portfolio.
“About half of our sales are not covered by these systems. That includes categories such as infant nutrition, specialised health products, and pet food, which follow regulated nutrition standards,” the spokesperson said.
The company’s Indian unit also has released a statement on the controversy.
“Nestle India believes that nutrition is a fundamental need and the food industry has a vital role to play in enabling healthier lives. Driven by our purpose, we are constantly striving to increase the nutrient profile of our products, as well as innovate with new and nutritious offerings,” said a Nestle India Spokesperson.
Hmm … will the development have an impact on the company’s Indian unit?
According to analysts, given that Nestle’s India portfolio is quite different from its parent company, the development will not have much of an impact here.
“Given that Nestle has not positioned its products such as Maggi in the health category there is no change in the perception towards its brand with the recent development,” says an analyst at a top brokerage firm.
Out of Nestle’s 35 billionaire brands, only nine have a presence in India. Its brands such as DiGiorno croissant crust pizza, Hot Pockets pepperoni pizza, San Pellegrino drink, and Nesquik with the worst scores, as mentioned in the Financial Times report, are not present in India.
“Indian portfolio is different from the parent company’s as it is a small sub-set with a lot of localisation for country-specific needs. Also, India is one of the few countries which has had a local research and development facility for a long time,” said Abneesh Roy, Executive Vice-President, Edelweiss Financial Services.
Besides this, Nestle India has a higher share of milk and value-added milk products in its sales mix, which bodes well for the company say analysts given that milk has a high nutritional quotient. Last year, the company drew over 46 percent of its sales from milk and nutrition products, higher than prepared dishes which includes Maggi noodles (shown in the chart below). Volume growth, however, is driven by prepared dishes.
Its initiatives in the country towards introducing atta, spinach variants of Maggi noodles, fruit and nuts to chocolates and reducing sugar and salt content are being seen as an effort to increase the health quotient in its products, by analysts.
Devangshu Dutta, chief executive at retail consultancy Third Eyesight is of opinion that India usually remains unimpacted by developments in these multinationals globally as there is lower sensitivity and awareness in the country. “Take, for example, veganism which is a huge trend in the West but has not caught on as much in India yet.”
He believes the country would eventually be impacted by these developments but not immediately.
What is the real significance of this controversy?
Nestle has come under fire in the past because of concerns about its food products. Back in 2015, Nestle had landed in trouble after Maggi, its most popular product in the country, was found to have monosodium glutamate or MSG by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI). In a major setback for the company, the food safety regulator had consequently banned the sale of the product in the country. Maggi then commanded over 80 percent of the market share in India. Nestle’s volumes had plunged sharply in 2015 due to the Maggi crisis. (as shown in the chart below).
Subsequently, after five months of legal battle, Nestle relaunched Maggi in the country, however, it resulted in the loss of some of its market share. Today, the company holds almost 60 percent market share in the instant noodles category, as per estimates.
In the light of these events, the recent controversy around its product portfolio becomes significant as Nestle cannot afford a repeat.
Source: moneycontrol
admin
February 11, 2021
Written By MONEYCONTROL NEWS
The biggest winner in terms of sales was BigBasket, which accounted for 50 percent of the sales growth followed by DMart, Grofers, Spencer’s Retail and StarQuick (Tata)
Representative Image (Reuters)
Online grocery sales for the largest online and offline retailers grew by a combined 65 percent to Rs 6,820 crore in FY20, while collective losses measured Rs 1,175 crore.
The biggest winner in terms of sales was BigBasket, which accounted for 50 percent of the sales growth, followed by DMart, Grofers, Spencer’s Retail and StarQuick (Tata), a report by The Economic Times said.
Moneycontrol could not independently verify the report.
BigBasket owner Innovative Retail Concepts clocked a net sales growth of 43 percent, or Rs 3,418 crore, while losses rose to Rs 424 crore, as per data with the Registrar of Companies and business intelligence platform Tofler, the report said.
Most executives and experts credit the growth jump to the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns, which pushed consumers towards online options for grocery and other purchases, it added.
Follow our LIVE Updates on the coronavirus pandemic here
A spokesperson for Grofers told the newspaper that the value of goods the company sold in FY20 vaulted 88 percent to Rs 3,000 crore, with losses at Rs 637 crore, largely due to investments for strengthening delivery services and building awareness.
Among offline retail chains, DMart’s e-commerce business saw sales zoom to Rs 345 crore, with losses at Rs 79 crore. StarQuick operator Fiora Online saw revenue of Rs 33 crore against a loss of Rs 21 crore and Spencer’s owner Omnipresent Retail reported Rs 15 crore sales with a loss at Rs 14 crore.
Devangshu Dutta, CEO of consulting firm Third Eyesight, said that the customer shift to online propelled investments to enhance capabilities in the space, while a concurrent rise in the average order values would likely benefit companies with a “healthier bottom line”.
Nielsen noted that online sales in the FMCG segment were notable, accounting for 3.1 percent of the India market value–in metros this surged to 8.6 percent as of the September quarter.
Source: moneycontrol
admin
June 7, 2020
Indian retailers welcoming customers back as stores are opening up – a look at what changes are in store.
