There
is a cruel joke about the Specialty Merchandise area at QVM - "There is
plenty of variety here - you go up one aisle and see T-shirts, hoodies and
sports shoes, but go up the next and you'll see sports shoes, hoodies and
T-shirts." Much has been done to introduce new traders into our market,
and the joke is not as relevant as it used to be, but work is still needed.
There
was an interesting conversation with two of our "repetition Traders"
this week and there appears to be general agreement on the basics. We are
talking about two different competing issues here. One is the public perception
that we have too much repetition and that is serious criticism that we must
address. The other is that some repetition is being driven by consumer demand
and that is serious business that we cannot ignore.
The
serious criticism is well documented. Marketing surveys and social media are
full of complaints that every aisle in the top end looks the same. That doesn't
make a lot of sense to traders who can see the important differences between
similar ranges and besides many of us change locations every trading day - how
can our market look the same? The bottom line is that public perception shows
sameness. Businesses spend millions of dollars measuring customer views just so
they can adjust to public perception. We need to listen to our customers as
well.
And
there are some areas of repetition that are being corrected. Our much maligned
ladies fashion retailers have been accused of selling the same items of
clothing. We are told there is one major supplier for most of our ladies
fashion traders. They are faced with extreme competition from the likes of
Zara, and H&M who refresh their fashion every few weeks. Even the largest
clothing retailers in the world are battling to compete with that sort of
flexibility. Sadly, at QVM natural attrition is having an impact as ladies
fashion sellers dominate our list of departing traders. Handbags are another
category that has seen natural attrition.
But
what about demand driven repetition? The most obvious example is Australian
souvenirs. Few outside observers, including local customers, can understand why
we need so many souvenir traders. It seems clear that all our souvenir traders
are doing well and that is based on casual observation of crowds around
souvenir stalls as well as candid comments from some of the traders concerned.
That is all good business that we shouldn't jeopardise just because of ill-informed
perceptions.
Of
course some of the repeaters don't help themselves. They have set up their
operations in the same way in each of their outlets, presumably because
uniformity attracts cost savings both in fittings and staffing. But what if
they were to clearly differentiate their offers by product grouping,
merchandising and/or general concept? And that doesn't just mean adding one or
two different ranges to their display. We are talking about a completely
different interpretation of their offer. Maybe some innovation is their best
protection against being labelled a "repeater" while still
maintaining multiple outlets.