cb200
Distinguished Member
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2010
- Messages
- 1,423
- Reaction score
- 1,974
I can only add perspective from working on the small brand side here. In many cases stores essentially pre-order from brands ahead of time in a wholesale relationship and production numbers are, in part, based off of that info. Thin initial buys with optional restocking from open to buy budget in season is a tough one to manage as far as inventory and cashflow for brands.Thanks for sharing @gdl203
This seems like an intuitive approach. What sort of challenges exist for boutiques and the smaller brands we love on Styleforum from adopting a similar approach?
A retailer who could sell 20 pieces but only orders 4 as a test reduces their inventory exposure but adds a false signal to the brand as far as projected demand. In apparel "just in time" is almost impossbly slow. Reordering and resupply due to supply chain distance is months not days. Unless finished goods are held in reserve by the brand restock will not happen.
You will always get inventory numbers wrong. Due to cash flow needs it is better to mitigate against holding excess inventory in either finished goods or raw materials as that's cash tied up. So, there's either underproduction or increased inventory risk absorbed by brands. As a brand you can finance against pre-booked orders. That would not be possible if everyone was doing low initial buy and second order based on sales type behaviour.
Sometimes due to fabric and factory minimums you have to simply go to production with much more than is pre-booked. Other times styles or colors don't make it through "adopt or drop" choices ahead of production due to too much inventory risk from lack of pre-bookings.
My personal belief is that the retail margin and financing terms are compensation for inventory risk and skin in the game for retailers. Some online retailers I've seen list inventory that they don't even have available in their warehouse and then order it to be shipped to them from the brands warehouse. That's unfair towards brick and mortar retailers who have taken the risk of holding inventory but would earn the same margin on a sale as the online retailer.
That might be rare, but it's a retailer pushing risk back to the brand and using the 30 day payment terms to have the brand finance their sales. It's solving the problem of the retailer at the expense of the brand. Not every brand can afford to carry their retailer or be a bank. Some retailers are great but many schemes out there make an already challenging business harder for small and medium sided brands to deal with.
Last edited: