Retail & Merchandising

AI pricing is broken, and everyone knows it. Orb just analyzed 66 AI companies and found something interesting: 𝟗𝟐% 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐲 𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐝 𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐥𝐞-𝐦𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐥 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐧𝐠. Quietly, completely, across the board. Why? Because usage is unpredictable, infra costs are high, and old SaaS pricing just doesn’t cut it anymore. We’re not pricing features anymore. We’re pricing intelligence. Some insights from the report: ◾𝐇𝐲𝐛𝐫𝐢𝐝 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐫𝐝 – 92% blend subscription, usage, freemium, and tiers in one structure ◾𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐨𝐧 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐛𝐨? Subscription + usage + freemium + tiered plans ◾𝐏𝐞𝐫-𝐬𝐞𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐚𝐝, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐢𝐭’𝐬 𝐧𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐚𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐞 – 85% of companies using SaaS pricing now pair it with usage-based pricing ◾𝟏𝟐% 𝐫𝐮𝐧 𝐦𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐥 – often segmenting between business and individual users … This shift is more than cosmetic. It reflects a deeper reality: AI products don’t fit cleanly into legacy monetization models. They need pricing systems that scale with usage, support experimentation, and reflect actual value delivered. If you’re building in AI, your pricing strategy isn’t just a detail, it’s a growth lever. 📊Full report https://lnkd.in/g-R3_cwU It’ll reshape how you think about monetizing AI.

One image just disrupted a £22 billion fashion empire more effectively than a thousand sustainability reports. 🔥 This isn't an official SHEIN campaign gone wrong. It's artist Emanuele Morelli's AI creation—a haunting visualisation showing what fast fashion's "affordability" really costs us. The image speaks volumes: a SHEIN billboard where the model's flowing dress transforms into a cascade of textile waste. Art communicating what statistics alone cannot. 5 uncomfortable truths this image forces us to confront: 1. The scale of fashion waste is staggering → 92 million tonnes of textile waste produced annually  → The equivalent of one rubbish lorry of textiles dumped every second  → Most fast fashion items designed to be worn fewer than 10 times 2. The business model depends on our amnesia → Constantly changing trends keep us buying  → Ultra-low prices remove financial friction  → Digital marketing creates artificial scarcity and FOMO  → We're trained to forget yesterday's purchases 3. The true cost isn't on the price tag → Environmental damage from production chemicals  → Microplastics shedding into water systems  → Supply chain ethics compromised for speed and cost  → Communities near production sites bearing health consequences 4. Our definition of "affordable" is broken → When clothing is cheaper than a coffee, someone else is paying  → True cost spread across communities, environments, and future generations  → Psychological cost of constant consumption never factored in 5. Solutions exist but require systemic change → Circular fashion models gaining traction  → Rental and resale markets growing rapidly  → Consumer awareness rising but needs to translate to behaviour While SHEIN isn't the only culprit in the fast fashion ecosystem, Morelli's artwork throws a spotlight on an uncomfortable reality we've normalised. What we wear reflects our values more than our taste. What is your wardrobe saying about yours? Image: Emanuele Morelli ♻️ Found this helpful? Repost to share with your network.  ⚡ Want more content like this? Hit follow Maya Moufarek.

With most Q2 results in, we’re getting a picture of retail performance. 🔄 A bit like in Uno, the reverse card is being played. Some retailers that have been performing badly are starting to see declines bottom out or are moving into modest growth (think Best Buy, Target, Foot Locker, Peloton, Victoria’s Secret, Gap). 📉 In contrast, some of the traditional star performers are struggling to keep up the fast pace and are seeing a slowdown (think Lululemon, Ulta, Dollar General). 💰 Are economic dynamics playing a role here? Partly. But strategy and competitive forces remain critical. Ulta has more competition, so too does Lululemon which failed to inspire with its womenswear in Q2. Target has recently invested a lot in price and value. Foot Locker, Victoria’s Secret and Gap all have turnaround programs. 🤔 On this front, don’t always buy the narratives retailers spin. Dollar General blames its weaker numbers on pressures on its customers. There is truth in this, but it has been true for a long time. The issue now is that inflation is not flattering the growth as much and there is more price competition in grocery. Oh, and some stores are terrible and are preventing sales and repeat visits.  🖼️ The long-term picture remains vital because quarterly results fluctuate and create noise. An example is Nordstrom, which has 3.4% growth this quarter, versus Dillard’s which has a 4.9% decline. Look at the Q2 numbers compared to 2019, and Dillard’s has grown sales by 4.4% while Nordstrom’s sales have grown by just 0.2%. A long term view is sometimes a better signal of the health of the business model. 🏡 Home related categories remain very pressured. A lot of this is linked to the more sluggish housing market: moving is an important driver of demand. Some bigger ticket purchases are financed, so high interest rates play a role too. ↔️ The market remains polarized with a balance of winners and losers. Out of the selection in the graph below, 17 retailers are in growth and 18 are in decline. 🐌 Growth rates have, generally, deteriorated since Q1. From the retailers shown below, 21 have lower growth rates than in Q1, 14 have higher growth rates. The average, overall growth rate has dropped by a modest 0.5 percentage points since Q1. So no recession, but some modest slowdown. #retail #retailnews #earnings #consumer #economy #shopping

Indian D2C has a fraud problem no one is talking about.. Everyone knows about returns. Fashion: ~30% return rate. Electronics/Health: ~20%. BPC: ~10% But, industry data shows: ~15% of returns are fraudulent. For a brand with 30% returns, that means 4-5% of total orders are fraud. It could be a return that comes back with the product used, damaged or even missing from the box. The worst thing I ever saw was my capsules replaced by gems and sent back 😂 The difference? Returns cost you just shipping with a product that can be reused. Frauds cost you the entire product + shipping + processing. The 3 Types of Return Fraud: 1. Wardrobing Order for wedding/event → Wear once, keep tags on → Return claiming "didn't fit" Fashion brands report: 15-20% of returns are worn items 2. Bracketing Order 4 sizes of same item → Try at home → Keep 1, return 3 Problem: Each return costs ₹100-150 in logistics. Customer pays nothing. 3. The Swap/Scam Order new laptop/phone → Return old/broken one in new box → Claim "defective" Electronics brands lose lakhs annually to serial number swaps alone. Let’s talk numbers: For a ₹10 Cr revenue fashion brand: Return rate: 30% = ₹3 Cr in returns Fraud rate: 20% of returns = ₹60 L fraudulent Cost per fraudulent return: - Forward shipping: ₹40 - Return shipping: ₹60 - Processing: ₹50 - Product: ₹1,000 (can't resell worn/damaged items) = Total loss: ₹1,150 Annual fraud loss: 6.9% of revenue. That's more than most D2C net margins. One of the reasons it's exploding is because of many people putting this as “Instagram hacks” or "Order outfits for events, return after". But, also because our ecommerce customers have not matured. Making return fraud = "smart shopping." While "7-day no questions asked return" is marketing advantage for brands, it’s getting fatal with these smart hacks. The sad part is that there's no good solution. - Industry-wide blacklist? Won't happen (anti-competitive) - Stricter policies or charge for returns? Lose to competition but the most likely to actually happen. - Better detection? Expensive, always lagging - Accept the loss? Kills margins Until fraud is culturally stigmatized again, D2C economics will stay broken. Are you guilt of doing this?

We're moving away from charging for *access* to software and toward charging for the *work delivered* by software & AI agents. Don't freak out: this doesn't mean everything will become *pay-as-you-go* overnight. I can think of 7 flavors of charging for work: 1️⃣ Pay-as-you-go - No commitment, totally flexible - Enterprise procurement teams usually *hate* this! - Works best when your customers can bill-back the expense or bake it into an operating budget - Otherwise, there's a risk of customers policing their own usage (taximeter effect) 2️⃣ Subscription + pay-as-you-go - Small level of commitment helps 'lock customers in' and give them access to advanced features, support, etc. - Works well when the usage metric is getting commoditized (ex: SMS messages, compute, storage) -- you can advertise a low usage fee & make up for it with the subscription fee - Still not quite loved by enterprise procurement since their bill isn't predictable yet now includes multiple line items... 3️⃣ Three-part tariff (usage subscription + PAYG) - Similar to the above, but with a larger subscription fee that includes some level of usage "included" - Folks usually advertise the initial usage as a gift ("get your first 500 SMS messages for free!") - Including a minimum level of usage helps get the customer hooked & usually incentivizes more overall consumption 4️⃣ Usage-based subscription (high watermark) - Customers commit to a certain level of usage or tier (ex: up to 5,000 API calls per month); this is typically "use it or lose it" - Subscriptions are for a high watermark of usage -- if usage exceeds the plan in a given month, they immediate move into upgrade territory - Fear of overages + usage fluctuations encourages sales to over-sell & customers to over-buy 5️⃣ Usage-based subscription (annual drawdown) - Similar to the above, but the usage allocation can be consumed flexibly over the course of 12 months similar to a gift card - This gives the customer plenty of time to monitor adoption & plan for an early renewal/upgrade if usage is trending above their commit - Great for customers with seasonality or month-to-month usage fluctuations who still want a predictable bill 6️⃣ Roll-overs - If the customer doesn't consume their full allocation, they can "roll it over" to the next year -- typically only if they commit to a flat or increased renewal - More customer friendly, but also more painful to manage! 7️⃣ Adaptive flat rate - The customer commits to a usage-based subscription, but can use the product as much as they want with no overages/upgrades during that period - Their tier resets up/down at renewal based on their actual usage behavior - Much more predictable for customers while encouraging them to increase consumption (downside is that you could be stuck with the costs!) -- I suspect most folks will offer multiple options as they seek to balance lands, expands & tough procurement convos. The downside: complexity.

The same people hunting for discounts on Myntra are paying ₹1,500 for instant fashion on Zepto. This isn't just another retail trend. It's a complete reversal of how we understand fashion buying. Urban consumers have started treating fashion like groceries, demanding immediate delivery for immediate needs. Think about it. That Saturday evening party outfit can't wait three days.  The campus event tomorrow needs the perfect look today. Quick commerce understood this shift before traditional retail even noticed and quick commerce platforms are specifically targeting trend-conscious urban customers and Gen Z. Why? Because they're willing to pay ₹500 to ₹1,500 on Zepto or ₹1,400 to ₹1,600 on NEWME for 25 to 60 minute delivery. The implications for fashion brands are staggering. Expanding inventory to new regions now requires: → Tech-led demand prediction systems → Understanding hyperlocal preferences → Building distributed warehouses → Tracking regional buying patterns Brands studying fashion demand must consider completely new factors. Weekend travel creates spikes in metro cities. Festive seasons hit differently across regions. Occasion-based purchases drive impulse buying. Each locality has its own style DNA. Traditional retail spent decades perfecting central warehouses and seasonal collections. Quick commerce demands the opposite. Small inventory points everywhere. Weekly design drops. Regional customization. Fashion has entered the 10-minute economy, and there's no going back. What's one fashion emergency that made you wish for instant delivery?

When Johnson & Johnson spun off Kenvue, many of the leaders who joined saw it as an opportunity to operate in a fast, agile, stand-alone environment. Now, as Kimberly-Clark acquires Kenvue for nearly $49B, I can’t help but wonder: what happens to that kind of talent next? People who thrive in a start-up-like culture: speed, ownership, experimentation - often find it hard to adjust to a slower, more structured, process-heavy organization. And Kimberly-Clark, while world-class in legacy and discipline, is not known for agility or fast-paced innovation. So the question becomes: will Kimberly-Clark recognize and leverage the entrepreneurial talent they’ve just inherited or will those people eventually walk away, frustrated by hierarchy and pace? In M&A, most of the headlines focus on synergies and cost savings. But cultural integration is where deals often succeed or fail. Especially in consumer goods, where people and creativity drive performance more than any spreadsheet ever will. Curious to hear from my FMCG network: how can established giants like Kimberly-Clark preserve the innovative DNA of the companies they acquire? #FMCG #Growth #Trending #Consumergrowth

Cold digital interactions will destroy your D2C brand. Your beauty product is at risk of failing if you don’t address this. Industry is rooted in enhancing self-image and boosting confidence, goals that are inherently emotional. While online shopping is undeniably convenient, it often comes at the expense of personal interaction. This is especially problematic in the beauty sector, where purchasing decisions are often influenced by sensory experiences, personalized recommendations, and emotional connections. +64% consumers believe brands are losing touch with customer experience. +85% higher sales achieved by brands that emotionally engage. +68% women & 56% men choose beauty products based on how they make them feel. >>Online emotional challenges << →Lack of personalization in online transactions. E-commerce lacks the personal engagement of in-store shopping, such as trying products and consulting with beauty experts. →Absence of sensory experiences. Customers are unable to explore key sensory elements like texture, scent, and application when shopping online. →Overwhelming variety. The sheer number of options online can confuse customers and lead to decision fatigue without proper guidance. >>Strategies to build emotional connections<< →Transform brick and mortar stores into immersive experiences. Redefine your physical stores as experiential hubs where customers can enjoy personalized consultations, interactive product trials, and even beauty treatments. +30% boost in sales is seen in flagship stores that offer immersive experiences. →Retail as entertainment, retailtainment. Host creative pop-up shops, in-store events, and experiential retail activations to engage customers emotionally with unique deco, exclusive product offerings, and hands-on activities. +70% of beauty consumers value in-store experiences over online alternatives. →Leverage influencer trust. Partner with influencers who bring authenticity to your brand by sharing personal stories, reviews, and tutorials. Their relatability and trustworthiness create stronger emotional ties with consumers. +49% customers rely on influencer recommendations for beauty product purchases. →Build community through social media. Use social media to foster continuous engagement through live Q&A sessions, interactive content, user-generated campaigns, and community forums. +72% of beauty consumers discover products through social media. To finish. Despite the challenges of the digital era, the industry is finding ways to close the emotional gap with creative solutions like flagship experiences, influencer collaborations, virtual consultations, and community-driven marketing. Check out my curated collection of visuals to spark your next big idea. Featured brands: Benefit Glossier Kylie Cosmetics Marc Jacobs Molecula Miu Miu Nina Ricci Laneige Rhode #BeautyBusiness #EmotionalConnection #SocialBeauty #ExperientialRetail #InfluencerMarketing

This company made ₹576 crore in India by saying no to the biggest e-commerce giants. This is the story of how UNIQLO, a Japanese clothing giant, chose to swim against the tide-when most global fashion brands in India rushed to list on Amazon or Flipkart, UNIQLO boldly said no to the biggest marketplaces. Launched in 2019, UNIQLO earned ₹139 crore in its first year. Fast forward to FY23, they’ve grown 4X, proving their unique strategy works. Here’s how they did it: 📌They chose to stay off Amazon and Flipkart, focusing on its app and website to control its brand and customer experience. 📌Compared to other fast fashion brands like H&M or Zara, UNIQLO’s products often come with a higher price tag. But they justify it through superior quality, timeless designs, and innovative materials (like HEATTECH and AIRism) 📌While fast fashion giants rely on aggressive sales and discounts, UNIQLO focuses on trust, slow but steady growth, and loyalty. From opening in Delhi in 2019 to 15 stores across India today, UNIQLO uses data to expand where it matters, rather than chasing scale. I managed to visit their stores during my trip to Japan and truly amazed at the experience at the store as well comfort of the products. In a world of marketplaces, UNIQLO is building its own market. What’s your take? Does this “quality over quantity” approach resonate with today’s consumers?

India’s digital-first fashion brand journey - from Clicks to Bricks India’s homegrown D2C fashion landscape has entered its next chapter in the last decade or so Cava Athleisure recently launched its first offline store in Bengaluru Orion Mall And not just Cava, after years of building strong digital communities, brands like Freakins, Blissclub, Snitch, The Bear House etc are stepping confidently into the offline world, opening physical stores after initial few years of operating digitally 🔶 Why - the shift 🔸Brand-Building & Community Physical stores offer experiential branding, events & community-led engagement including consumers & influencers, something digital can’t fully replicate The store facade & window, be it in a mall or high-street also works as an impactful billboard in the consumers mind amidst the digital clutter - announcing the brand has arrived 🔸Consumer Trust & Tangibility Fashion is tactile. As brands scale, offline stores become powerful trust signals, letting consumers to see, touch, feel & try before buy Also enables brands to do visual product storytelling and store team engaging with consumers in a much better way 🔸Higher AOV & Better Conversions Stores often deliver higher average order values and far stronger conversion rates than digital channels Customers walking in these stores are mostly brand loyalist with real purchase intent, and more often than not asking - naya kya hai? 🔸CAC Optimization With rising acquisition costs online, offline retail becomes a strategic lever to reduce dependence on paid performance marketing While for customers, they get the flexibility to explore amongst the considered set of brands before zeroing down to their final purchase ◼️Opportunities Ahead Omnichannel flywheel: Unified single view of inventory, possibly endless isles + data + loyalty + flexibility of click-collect or buy-return → seamless journeys and a happy customer Experiential retail: Stores doubling as multiple touchpoints from content studios, event spaces to even micro-warehouses ◼️Challenges to Navigate High real-estate rentals & operational costs Supply-chain discipline needed for consistent in-store experience Balancing product assortment and price parity across channels Maintaining brand freshness in an offline setting ◼️The Way Forward The future belongs to digitally-built, omnichannel-scaled brands While online gives speed & reach, offline gives depth & loyalty The most successful D2C labels are those that treat physical stores not as an afterthought or fomo, but as a strategic extension of their brand ecosystem Interesting fact: The D2C brands who started over a decade ago took slightly longer for online to offline shift (~7 years), vis-a-vis within the last decade (~5 years), and the more recent ones much lesser than that Clicks create the brand, Bricks will only compound it. Your thoughts! #Indian #Fashion #Retail #D2C #Online #Brand #Offline #Expansion