270 likes | 445 Views
Vendor Negotiations. Strategic Implications. Retail Buyer: Autonomy & Compensation. Critical entrepreneurial component—key to the retailer establishing autonomy, or self-control, in relationships with vendors.
E N D
Vendor Negotiations Strategic Implications
Retail Buyer: Autonomy & Compensation • Critical entrepreneurial component—key to the retailer establishing autonomy, or self-control, in relationships with vendors. • This course is important only as long a buyer is employed by a retailer. The buyer must be a negotiator.
Discretionary categories more important to high growth categories Top 10 Fastest Growing Categories (Dollar Sales % Change vs. Year Ago) food & beverage categories (bolded categories on both lists) Source: Nielsen Scantrack, Total U.S. – All Outlets Combined; 52 week increments (vs. prior year); UPC-coded117 major category groupings U.S. Buying Trends
Discretionary categories dominate list of fastest unit growth categories Top 10 Fastest Growing Categories (Unit Volume % Change vs Year Ago) food & beverage categories (bolded categories on both lists) Source: Nielsen Scantrack, Total U.S. – All Outlets Combined; 52 week increments (vs. prior year); UPC-coded117 major category groupings U.S. Buying Trends
Product Variety and Solution Motivators To what extent do each of the following influence your decision to shop at a particular retailer? Source: Nielsen, Global Online Survey, Q1 2011 Consumer Shopping Behaviour Q2 2011
Private Brands 15.3% growth rate! 2012 $108.6 billion 2009 $94 billion Source: Nielsen Scantrack, Total U.S. – All Outlets Combined;52 weeks ending 12/26/2009 & 11/24/2012; UPC-coded U.S. Buying Trends
Importance of the Retail Buyer • When the category is relatively small… • When consumers do not respond or are not interested in variety… • When consumers do not respond to price promotions… • When brand loyalty (can’t be switched) is above average for a FMCG category… • When the “supplier knows best” what SKUs to stock in the assortment…
Value is a key driver of store choice but not the only lever to pull • 59% - Good value for the money • 59% - Great sales and promotions • 56% - Products in stock • 55% - Lowest price • 53% - Convenient location • 53% - High quality fresh & produce • 48% - Quality meat department • 48% - Carries a variety of items Source: Nielsen, Global Online Survey, Q1 2011; Highly Influential answers Consumer Shopping Behaviour Q2 2011
Importance of the Retail Buyer • When there are few geographic differences in demand… • When the retailer decides to go with an exclusive arrangement with a supplier (won’t stock competitors’ lines)… • When only two supplier firms are in competition… • When state law restricts you to a limited set, or only one suppliers…
% saying they Agree/ Strongly Agree: Strong perception of store brand quality & fewer think store brands for those on tight budgets U.S. Buying Trends Source: Nielsen Homescan, Panel Views surveys
When the buyer’s role is not significant… • How important can retail differentiation be to the sector? • How attractive can the gross margins be, relative to other retail types? • When the functions of determining the assortment gets shifted to the supplier… • When the buyer’s role in the channel is of little significance, what does that indicate about a retailer?
Buyer Challenges • Who will be the suppliers? • Manufacturers • Wholesalers • Can we encourage a new supplier? What do we have to offer? • Can we create competition by making the category more important to consumers? • Private label—will we bear the risks of a supplier?
Retailer’s demand curve Vendor’s demand curve
Retailer’s demand curve Vendor’s demand curve
Distribution Intensity • Shopping goods • Convenience goods • The supplier ALWAYS wants distribution to be more intensive than the retailer/buyer.
Type of relationship One-Time, “Transactional” Relational partnerships Strategic alliances Functional relationships Characteristics Don't expect further contact Series of one- time exchanges Close, trusting, seek mutually beneficial relationship Mutual investment, shared profits Time horizon Short-term Recurrent Long-term Long-term Concern for other party Low Low Medium High Trust Low Low Low High Investment in relationship Low Low Medium High Accommodation Negotiation Nature of relationship Conflict, bargaining Coordination
Transactional/Functional • Short term or “on-off” • Many suppliers and buyers • Disloyalty and lack of commitment • Low switching costs, little or no investment made in relationships, new suppliers encouraged • Changes in customer/supplier make little difference • Loose or no standard procedures • Exchange centered on single person in firm
Partnerships/Alliances • Long-term • Few suppliers and buyers • Higher degree of loyalty and commitment • High switching costs, significant investments will have been made in the partnership • Change in customer/supplier causes disruption • Strict procedural guidelines • Many people and departments involved in the exchange
Strategic Alliances • Alliance between a vendor and retailer with the highest levels of mutual trust and commitment. • Trust—should not mean that monitoring is “non-existent” • Commitment, vendor not seeking additional retailers, retailers satisfied with exclusive dealings (current dependence on vendor)
Markdown Money • Payment from vendor to retailer to compensate retailer for “unanticipated” discounts (reductions) necessary to sell merchandise in season. • Not a consistent expectation across retailers, but necessary for some suppliers to maintain the relationship. • Come to characterize the relationship between a larger retailer and its branded apparel suppliers. • Inefficient channels tend to have dysfunctional behavior. How long can markdown money remain a characteristic of apparel?
Retailer able to obtain aguaranteed 50% markup, vendor with unique product
Retailer can’t sell product, and must discount beyond anticipated levels, receives markdown money to cover portion of discounting.
Retailer able to obtain aguaranteed 50% markup, vendor with unit markup becomes more profitable lowering costs