Why does Burberry not hold it's value?

[papertiger]

@Purseloco that's very interesting, thanks for the book recommendation.

You could reason:
Why does a customer feel the need to sell a once beloved item before the end of its usable lifespan? Then you could look at the item in isolation
Why do other brands' goods hold value (usually just H & C)? Then one could compare between those that do and 'X'

Mostly, I think it's just fashion. Just like fashion changes, so does the popularity of certain brands.

IMO, these were also contributing factors:
Burberry did themselves no favours 'throwing the baby out with the bathwater' when they brought in RT.
They thought that Burberry could be another Gucci (that was riding high at that time in terms of growth). Burberry is not Gucci.
There was a lack of loyalty within Burberry, within the team or to Burberry as a brand.
Burberry (historically) revolutionises, not 'evolutionises'. Who wants to invest thousands in products that can look dated tomorrow?
RT demanded and brought with him a large Italian team and Burberry is quintessentially British. It sold/sells itself on its British heritage/edginess/subcultural wit. Italian fashion and sensibility is totally different.
The logo-heavy rebrand was awful.

I am hoping that with Lee as CD Burberry will show edge, British classicism, wit and class again.

 

[Kevinaxx]

I read a book called Start With Why by Simon Sinek. Maybe some brands lose the WHY they are in business and just make clothes and bags. They do not sell the clientele on the WHY they sell the products they make. A brand has to sell the WHY to the customer otherwise they will just be another clothes and bag maker. People pay a very high price for Hermes because they have not forgotten the WHY they make the bags, clothing, etc. For example, why would anybody pay thousands for a bag at Hermes because it represents luxury, status, wealth. Maybe Burberry lost the WHY.

When I think of Simon Sinek I think of the golden circle or ring.

The why is very important. Not just for companies but for anything. Why does someone do something?

Once you find out the why though, it’s not enough to have purpose. It’s also the execution which includes marketing though, everything is centered back to the why, because the why is what drives/motivates people, even more so than money, and that’s what leaderships should know/recognize as they scale because it’s a pain point for those who are small as they grow and the large, for them to remain successful.

 

[Kevinaxx]

@Purseloco that's very interesting, thanks for the book recommendation.

You could reason:
Why does a customer feel the need to sell a once beloved item before the end of its usable lifespan? Then you could look at the item in isolation
Why do other brands' goods hold value (usually just H & C)? Then one could compare between those that do and 'X'

Mostly, I think it's just fashion. Just like fashion changes, so does the popularity of certain brands.

IMO, these were also contributing factors:
Burberry did themselves no favours 'throwing the baby out with the bathwater' when they brought in RT.
They thought that Burberry could be another Gucci (that was riding high at that time in terms of growth). Burberry is not Gucci.
There was a lack of loyalty within the Burberry, neither within the team nor to Burberry
Burberry (historically) revolutionises, not 'evolutionises'. Who wants to invest thousands in products that can look dated tomorrow?
RT demanded and brought with him a large Italian team and Burberry is quintessentially British. It sold/sells itself on its British heritage/edginess/subcultural wit. Italian fashion and sensibility is totally different.
The logo-heavy rebrand was awful.

I am hoping that with Lee as CD Burberry will show edge, British classicism, wit and class again.

Good points (esp the Italian infusion), re: Simon, the Ted talk he does (there’s a YouTube) is also good.

 

[protein_]

Realising that many brands also have outlet stores (Gucci and Prada are the first that come to mind)...

I can't help but wonder if Burberry's outlets, and specifically their "made for outlets" or made for overseas stores items, contribute to their inability to hold value for their core brand?

Maybe someone who is more well-versed in that arena can shed some light on that idea - it was just my first undeveloped thought.