Erotic capital and the KAM

The term ‘erotic capital’ refers to six or seven different but connected elements. It is multifaceted in that beauty, obviously, is a central element, but there are cultural variations in what determines beauty. There is also the idea of sexual attractiveness, which is not the same as beauty. Your sex appeal can have as much to do with your personality, style and sense of your femininity/masculinity.

There are also your social skills, whether you are a life-and-soul-of-the-party person and how you generally interact with other people. Your social presentation is important too, what you wear and how you wear it, as is your sexuality itself, your degree of sexual competence. But, overall, it’s important to remember that your erotic capital is as determined by your charm, charisma and social skills as much as anything else.

Scoring high on erotic capital may override in itself any deficiencies you have in economic, human and social capital. And it can have a considerable impact on a KAM’s salary too.

Have an interesting weekend, from the NamNews Team!

How shops help shoppers to choose wine

With research indicating that three-quarters of shoppers find choosing wine 'an ordeal’, and 75 per cent having a repertoire of just two wines, there appears to be real scope for needs-based merchandising of wine in the aisle.

In fact in their wine-traffic, Tesco have isolated two key groups:

-       “Tell Me” customers (47%), who are likely to be intimidated by the wine aisle, prefer to choose from a small selection of wine because it’s easier, tend to be lured by promotions and expect good availability of whatever they choose

-        “Engage Me” shoppers (53%), who are more interested in exploring, and will navigate by colour, grape and country, seeking out wines that are new or intriguing.

Tesco are currently refitting 870 Tesco wine departments to give each type of shopper their own grazing area.

-       “Tell Me” people get a range of own-label wines called Simply. They also get a neat section of three-for-£12 wines, and a “Great With” display.

-       The 'Engage Me’ shoppers get the traditional by-country layout, but with extra boxes so that different wines can be highlighted – new wines, medal-winning wines, journalist-recommended wines. Wines with a reason to buy that goes beyond price.

A retailer that takes the trouble to ask, has the wit and resource to remerchandise accordingly and can validate the result in real-time, has to grow share at the expense of more margin-orientated competitors.

Pro-active OFT innovation in competition law

News that UK farmers are to be told by the OFT that they can join forces to get better prices from supermarkets and other customers represents a breakthrough in the application of competition law not only for farmers but also for suppliers and retailers in other categories.

Whilst farmers now need to identify partners both legal and commercial that can help them to optimise their new freedom, all suppliers and retailers need to reassess their application of competition law.

Essentially, because of a combination of limited knowledge and an over-zealous application of the law some suppliers may become over-cautious in their dealings with major customers. In effect they confine themselves to the middle of the ball-park while their competitors, with a more pragmatic approach (and possibly the advantage of risk-neutral/risk-seeking inhouse lawyers) enjoy the freedom of operating up to the legal edge, without risk…

In doing so, it is vital that suppliers assess the risk–profiles of their own organisation (risk-averse, risk-neutral or risk-seeking), their internal and external legal advisers, and their major customers in order to ensure that al decisions do not net down to risk-avoidance, and thus compromise commercial opportunities.

In an unprecedented era where every little helps, it is vital that suppliers and retailers develop robust legal-commercial strategies that allow them to work to the legal limits, and give them the freedom to negotiate on a fair-share basis..

Men falling victim to 'manity sizing' on the High Street?

Four out of five British stores are selling trousers with a waist up to two inches inch wider than the measurement shown on the garment.

An article in the Sunday Telegraph details research showing that M&S, Debenhams, Next, and Topman were found to be flattering customers by adding up to inch to the waistline. Supermarkets were the worst offenders, with some selling items with two inches to spare.

Overall, 28 out of 50 garments checked were found to be larger than on the label; seven were at least one and a half inches bigger; among those was a pair of Levi's 501 jeans, a fashion bulwark, which was 32.5 inches and not 31 as advertised.

Whilst this may meet vanity needs by being able to squeeze into the same size of trousers despite a growing waistline, savvy consumers are becoming increasingly frustrated to discover their sizes vary in this manner.

However, the real issue is not the size-variations but the variety of explanations offered by retailers, ranging from ‘manufacturing variations’ (as if retailers were unaccustomed to rejecting whole truck-loads of out-of-spec products), certain jeans ‘being worn lower on the hips to create a slightly cooler, baggy look’, designs to take into account ‘shrinkage of up to half an inch on the first wash’ all adding the growing reluctance of savvy consumers to outsource any aspect of the decision-making-process to marketers or retailers, ever again….

Given the opportunity for an online clothing supplier to produce sizes as described, and also save consumers the annoyance of having to try on trousers instore, perhaps the real victims of ‘manity sizing’ will be ‘bricks ‘n mortar’ outlets?

Amazon near-home delivery…

For customers with issues ref having their online purchases delivered to home or office, Amazon are apparently trialling a delivery locker in 7-11 for secure collection.

When the package is actually delivered, the customer receives an email notification along with a bar code to his smartphone and heads to the 7-Eleven. There he’ll stand in front of the locker system, which looks like the offspring between an ATM machine and a safety deposit box. The machine will scan the bar code on his handset to receive a PIN number. He’ll punch that PIN number and retrieve the package.

A prototype delivery locker from Amazon has been installed in the back of a 7-Eleven store in Seattle’s Capitol Hill neighbourhood.

Real issue will be how long 7-Eleven will be an essential part of the process i.e. a standalone unit in key 'commuter-stop locations'?

KAM as mystery shopper…?

Given the increasing cost of ensuring instore compliance via more formalised store-checks, perhaps KAMs could benefit from approaching the problem from a different direction?

Why not consider signing up as a mystery shopper, where training in disguise, observation, forensic investigation, and systematic purchasing could help you focus anonymously on your category from a savvy consumer-shopper perspective, experiencing your brand in a real-world context?

Then value-check your trade funding....
Have an enigmatic weekend, from the Namnews Team!

Mid-shelf Shopper bias…?

In their article 'Preferring the One in the Middle: Further Evidence for the Centre-stage Effect',  researchers Paul Rodway, Astrid Schepman and Jordana Lambert of the University of Chester, UK analyse three separate but related experiments in which they tested the association between the location of an item in a series and how often that item is selected as preferable over other choices. The results indicate a clear tendency toward favouring items located in the middle of a row -- regardless of whether it runs horizontally or vertically. (access study )

"People may not be aware of this preference, but it may influence choice in a wide range of day-to-day settings, such as the products people buy in shops or via online shopping, the responses they provide in surveys, and potentially the people they select for a range of tasks or functions," Rodway said.

In the final test, researchers attempt to generalise the results of previous experiments. Instead of presenting pictures on a questionnaire, they asked participants to choose among a display of actual pairs of socks. Half of those surveyed viewed the column of socks at head level and the remainder observed it at thigh height. Once again the results supported the so called 'center-stage effect'. Most participants chose the middle pair of socks -- though researchers noted that pairs in the lowest two locations on the display were chosen least often -- a result that could indicate a relationship between the relative height of an item on display and consumer preference.

Or perhaps even relative heights of shoppers?

Price maintenance via content reduction

Given the difficulties in passing on escalating ingredient and energy cost increases to the consumer because of a combination of trade resistance and breaches of price-points, some brand owners have resorted to pack-content reduction to mask price increases. Whilst they obviously preserve their legal integrity by updating the weight indication on the label, the real issue is consumer perception

To my mind this is one of the fundamental issues in the brand-consumer relationship in the current climate. As we know, a consumer buys a combination of Product, Price, Presentation and Place when choosing a brand. A consumer consciously or unconsciously compares this offering with alternatives available in the market. Good brand management is about maintaining these 4 Ps in harmony, and meeting the expectation of the consumer.

Brand equity is thus about preserving this trust of the consumer in the brand, in effect when they open the pack, the contents meet or even exceed their expectation.

Even being open and honest with the consumer when making changes to the offering may not prevent the consumer’s perception that they have been short-changed, causing them to second-guess all changes to the brand, thus damaging brand equity

When a brand owner changes one element of the package i.e. increases the price, or reduces the amount the consumer receives for the price, this balance is disturbed, and can cause the consumer to ‘re-compare’ the offer with alternatives available.

The real problem is that the consumer may then switch to a competitor brand without complaining to the brand owner, thus resulting in loss of market share…

( It used to be said that a complaining consumer was a loyal user trying to give the brand a second chance! )

As far as price-points are concerned, brand owners need to ask themselves if the savvy consumer is really influenced by ‘5s and 9s’ in this ‘post’ financial-crisis era…?.

Perhaps brand owners should allow cost-price increases to flow through to the retail price, hoping that eventually the same ingredient cost-increases will affect the competitors’ retail prices, given that legislation rightly prevents any price-coordination in the market.

If the brand’s offering is changed without resulting in equivalent changes in competitive offerings, then the result has to be loss of market share until 4P equilibrium is restored in the category..

Perhaps the real answer is to use a price increase as an opportunity to fundamentally re-assess the total offering vs. alternatives available, and update the offering to suit the savvy consumer…?