Sunday, November 18, 2018

No longer a trend-setter

Elizabeth Winkler reports in the Wall Street Journal that sex isn't selling...at least not at Victoria's Secret.
Victoria’s Secret was once a trendsetter in the world of women’s undergarments. Its catalog of supermodels in lacy push-up bras and its annual fashion show were the stuff of fantasies. Now the brand selling sexiness—or, at least, a particular vision of sexiness—has lost its appeal.

Shares of L Brands , LB -1.15% whose main businesses are Victoria’s Secret and Bath & Body Works, are down 41% this year. That is primarily due to slowing sales at Victoria’s Secret, particularly of bras, which make up 35% of L Brands’s sales. In July, Victoria’s Secret’s semiannual sale was so weak the retailer was forced to extend it by two weeks and offer steeper discounts, leading analysts to declare the brand broken.

...Instead of $60 padded bras that sell male fantasies, they are opting for cheaper undergarments that prioritize their own comfort. Victoria’s Secret has tried to adapt with the times, ending its catalog, doubling down on sports bras and even releasing a collection of “bralettes”—bras without underwire and padding.

...Last year, ratings for the Victoria’s Secret fashion show plunged 30% among 18 to 49 year-olds. (“Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer,” which ran on the same network that evening, performed much better.) It is a safe bet that this year’s show, which will air on Dec. 2, will meet a similar fate. Chief marketing officer Ed Razek recently drew a backlash when he said the fashion show should not include transgender models since it is supposed to be “a fantasy.” (Criticism on social media prompted him to retract the statement.)

Strong brands like Victoria’s Secret can be powerful forces, but when times change, that sharp sense of identity can make it harder to evolve. Combined with consumers deserting malls, where the retailer is heavily exposed, that means sales will likely keep dropping.

Victoria’s Secret can keep fantasizing. But that won’t be enough to win women, or investors, back.
Read more here.

No comments: