Casper had been out raising a large round of funding when the talks started, sources said. The startup generated around $200 million in sales in 2016 — its second full year in business — and was valued at around $550 million after its last private investment in 2015.
And, as the headline says: “Target looked at buying the mattress startup Casper for $1 billion but will invest instead.”
There’s a fair amount of commentary on this type of e-commerce stuff in this year’s Internet Trends report as well.
In 2014, more than 93% of our transactions took place in stores, less than 7% digital. That season we had just started shipping from a small number of stores. In 2015, that same timeframe, digital sales reached almost 10% of our total sales. We more than doubled our ship-from store-capability to nearly 500 stores. We fulfilled 41% of all our digital orders inside of a store.
For 2016, just a few months ago, just last year, digital sales climbed to 14%, more than twice what we did two years earlier. We double ship-from-stores again, more than 1,000 stores. Our stores were fulfilling 68% of our digital orders. We finished December with record digital growth, including record-breaking days on both Thanksgiving and Cyber Monday.
Always nice to see multi-year numbers.
- Video: “In 2017 Amazon is expected to spend $4.5bn on television and film content, roughly twice what HBO will spend. But it has a big payoff.”
- Prime momentum: “Mr Nowak reckons the company had 72m Prime members last year, up by 32% from 2015.”
- Cloud: “Last year AWS’s revenue reached $12bn, up by more than 150% since 2014.”
- Anti-trust, in the US: “If competitors fail to halt Amazon’s whirl of activities, antitrust enforcers might yet do so instead. This does not seem an imminent threat. American antitrust authorities mainly consider a company’s effect on consumers and pricing, not broader market power. By that standard, Amazon has brought big benefits.”
Are investors too optimistic about Amazon?
It’s a sore point for many shoppers, who are ready and eager to spend more on designer clothes if only they were available: 78% of respondents in a recent survey of plus-size shoppers said that they’d be willing to spend more money if designers offered more options, and 80% said they’d likely purchase an item from their favorite designer if that designer made plus sizes.
File under “if anything, more money. Plus, bonus: morals!”:
More and more designers and retailers seem to be waking up to that fact. The market for plus-size women’s clothing is over $20 billion, by some measures
A nice scenario’ing of brining manufacturing back to the US, told through Under Armour. For example, with factory-automation and higher labor prices, you don’t end up hiring 1,000’s of people:
Plank has lamented that we’ve been making clothes the same way for 100 years, and he hopes to change that with the innovation happening at UA Lighthouse. But a huge innovation in the footwear industry, as in other industries, is automation. Adidas now has two Speedfactories, its automated robot-helmed sites. According to Fortune, these only require 160 employees, cutting out many of the humans formerly needed for this kind of factory work.
Plank is fully aware of this tradeoff. When asked about creating jobs in the US, Plank told Footwear News, “It’s not pegged to have 175,000 of those jobs come back to America. I just wonder if there is a way that we can be more thoughtful, creative, and innovative. What if we could bring 100 of those jobs or 500 or 1,000 or 10,000 here?”
There’s also a nice discussion about a border tax’s effect on retail.
The summary is: on shoring manufacturing will create jobs, but probably much less than “like back in the good old days” notions. Further, in the overall retail system, it’ll require much investment and change.
As ever, for an administration that wants to “shock the system,” it fits what’s on the tin. Get some rubber shoes.
…a survey of the top retailers in the US and Europe. About 75 percent of them said that despite all the unprecedented investments they’ve made in retail over the last several years, they feel ill-prepared to handle and provide omni-channel capabilities.
Meanwhile, it’s clear that you need so look at online as the starting point of most purchases: “60 percent or more of in-store purchases start online ‘through digital engagement.’”
Amazon is quick to enter new retail markets:
Amazon reports e-commerce growth of 30 percent, whereas core retail is growing at only 2 percent. Amazon Fashion launched in a “very nascent way” in 2002 – it’s now the biggest fashion player in the U.S. Amazon has spent about $17 billion dollars on R&D around e-commerce. Walmart has spent under a billion. If Walmart cannot spend the money necessary to stay with Amazon, how will other retailers keep pace?
All of this was from a SFDC retail-focused person, no details on the survey.
Source: Salesforce Commerce Cloud CEO at NRF – 75 percent of retailers are “ill-prepared” for the omni-channel
I’m always amazed at how low IRL companies get valued. But: retail, manufactoring, and a history of funky management:
But fashion wasn’t the only thing to change; the retail business changed, too. The economic downturn was hard on the fashion industry as consumers cut back on spending. And brick-and-mortar stores have struggled as online retailers bite into their sales and target demographics. That can be especially harmful for brands like American Apparel, whose the business model is to open a bevy of stores and rely on foot traffic. “There are too many stores in too many places,” explained Cohen. “Everybody doing business in brick-and-mortar is migrating in some way, shape, or form to the internet. Everyone is seeing a chronic decline in the productivity of their real estate.”
It doesn’t include the stores:
All of this helps explain why the $88 million Gildan deal could be viewed as arguably the last great American Apparel marketing feat. Even with all its financial and legal woes, the company still attracted 12 bids. (Sources told Reuters that Amazon and Forever 21 were considering purchasing as well.) And while Gildan won’t be purchasing any of American Apparel’s 110 U.S. stores—which were also up for sale—the company was willing to pay nearly $90 million just for intellectual property and some equipment. That’s quite a feat given that the brand was built on the premise of selling such basic designs.
Still, that brand, tho.
It’s good enough that I’m posting a K-Mart commercial here.
(Via Hot Tacos Bob)
The research company found that owners of the Echo spent around 10 percent more after they bought the voice-powered smart speaker than they did before.
The NPD Group’s Checkout Tracking purchase monitor provided the data, analyzing customer spending and overall number of receipts, and found that there was also a 6 percent bump in the overall number of purchases made by Echo owners on Amazon.com when compared to their pre-Echo existence.
Source: Amazon Echo owners spend more on Amazon, says NPD.