Retail Unwrapped from The Robin Report

Chip Wilson’s Fight To Save Lululemon, Redux

Pam Danziger — Wed, 14 Jan 2026 05:01:00 +0000

It’s been over a decade since Lululemon founder Dennis “Chip” Wilson was pushed out under a cloud of controversy, but he’s remained a thorn in its side ever since. Many company founders move on after a company goes public, and professional management eventually moves in. Not Wilson. He put his mind, heart and soul into building Lululemon, and after he left the company in 2015, he’s waged a personal crusade to keep that guiding brand spirit alive, for better or worse.

Is founder Chip Wilson able to save Lululemon, or will his ego push the brand further into irrelevance? And the answer is: One man’s ego is not the soul of a brand, and this founder’s re-emergence can’t dictate a public company board’s fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders.

Business Is Personal

A cynical observer might argue that Wilson’s crusade is all about the money. And they have a point. According to Forbes, Wilson is the single largest Lululemon shareholder with 8.4 percent of the stock—a stake that has lost roughly 60 percent of its value since December 2023. However, the value of his holdings jumped to $2.1 billion in a single day in December after CEO Calvin McDonald announced his exit. McDonald and the board more broadly have been frequent targets of Wilson’s ire, especially since sales in the U.S. have trended downward through 2025.

But it’s also got a lot to do with protecting his own legacy and reputation. He’s made more than his fair share of ham-fisted comments in the past; he doesn’t appear to have much of an internal filter. Being outspoken and self-assured are part and parcel of his personality—both a driver of his business success and his Achilles’ heel.

In an effort to tell his side of the story and uphold his reputation, he’s written two books—The Story of Lululemon: Little Black Stretchy Pants and Lululemon and the Future of Technical Apparel, the latter of which reached best-seller status. Yet a casual scan of his books and his long history of pointed comments against Lululemon’s leadership make it clear that, for Wilson, it isn’t just about the money, his reputation, or legacy. It’s deeply personal, echoing the perspective of the late founder of The Body Shop, Anita Roddick: “In business, it’s never just business. It’s always personal.”

Long-Running Feud

After guiding the company from its start in 1998, Wilson officially stepped aside as CEO in 2005, bringing in former Reebok executive Robert Meers to prepare the company for its 2007 IPO. Meers moved on in 2008 and was succeeded by Christine Day from Starbucks, who was eventually forced out in 2013 after product-quality and supply-chain issues came to light—most prominently, the see‑through leggings debacle.

All the while, Wilson served as the company’s chief innovation and branding officer and as chairman of the board through 2013, some of the blame for missteps under Day’s leadership rests on his shoulders. Nonetheless, he continued to kick up his own controversies, which eventually caught up with him and forced him off the board in 2015.

Wilson’s public grievances against the company began immediately after in 2016, when he wrote an open letter to the board stating that the company had “lost its way.” By then, Laurent Potdevin, who came from Toms, was at the helm of the company, but he too left abruptly in 2018 for alleged “misdeeds” that were never officially revealed but assumed to be related to the #MeToo movement.

Calvin McDonald succeeded him after stepping over from Sephora. McDonald had a pretty good run, taking the company from $2.7 billion in 2018 to $10.6 billion in 2024. After rendering his resignation in December, he will depart at the end of January. In that, Wilson scored a win. He took out a full-page Wall Street Journal ad last October, entitled “Lululemon: In a Nosedive,” where he let it fly. “On paper, Lululemon still looks good, but it’s losing its soul,” he wrote. “The deeper issue is not just management; it’s a disengaged Nominating and Governance Committee that has failed to safeguard the long-term vision.”

Lululemon: In a Nosedive

Throughout McDonald’s tenure, Wilson has been his leading critic, taking issue with the brand’s expansion into menswear and opposing its move into plus-sized ranges: “Through this whole diversity and inclusion thing, they’re trying to become like Gap, everything to everybody. I think the definition of a brand is that you’re not everything to everybody,” he said on the Tony Robbins Podcast.

He also vigorously opposed the company’s $500 million acquisition of the home-fitness technology company Mirror in 2020. Wilson may have been right about that, too. The company pulled the plug on Mirror in 2023 and moved to Peloton as its connected fitness partner.

Lululemon might have been better off if it had bought Under Armour, which Wilson urged in an outdoor advertisement posted outside the company’s headquarters in 2017. Or, more recently, he advocated acquiring Figs, which has innovated the hospital scrubs category in much the same way Lululemon did for workout apparel, combining fashionable styles with technical, high-performance fabrication.

Despite the vocal criticism of McDonald, Wilson’s biggest gripe is with the board and the direction it has taken the company: shifting the focus away from the company’s original culture of innovation, creative execution, and employee empowerment toward, in his words, feeding investors’ demands for quarterly growth and profits.

“We weren’t in the apparel business, we were in the people development business,” Wilson said on the podcast, referring to both the personal development of customers to achieve their fitness goals and the development of the company’s staff, where creativity and innovation originate.

The path forward Wilson detailed in the WSJ ad was to return Lululemon to its entrepreneurial, visionary roots:

Put product and brand back at the center. Rebuild the knowledge and systems that deliver product in nine months, not two years.
Bring entrepreneurial ownership back onto the board.
Empower creative leadership over merchants.
Stop chasing Wall Street at the expense of customers.
Recommit to the muse—the woman who inspires the brand.

He concluded, “Lululemon can keep growing, but growth alone is not a healthy measure or success. The true measure must be innovation and brand reputation. When these are strong, growth comes naturally; when they’re not, growth halts.”

Lululemon may be dangerously close to that tipping point. While the company expects to end fiscal year 2025 at around $11 billion in revenue, virtually all of this year’s growth will come from expansion in international markets. Revenues in the Americas, which account for about 70 percent of sales, have been flat or declining all year, including comparable sales off by 5 percent in the third quarter.

Wilson’s Latest Crusade

When McDonald tendered his resignation, no succession plan was in place—a pattern that keeps repeating itself. This is the fourth time that Lululemon has been unprepared to replace its CEO, underscoring Wilson’s critique that the company has failed to develop creative leadership.

As soon as the news broke, major investor Elliott Investment Management, with over $1 billion in stockholdings, put forward its handpicked candidate: 60-year-old Jane Neilsen, former CFO and COO of Ralph Lauren. Before that, she was CFO at Coach, following nearly 17 years climbing the ladder at PepsiCo in finance, investor relations and strategy. Essentially, she is cut from the same finance-first cloth as the rest of the board.

Wilson took a different tack, presenting a proposal that would go to the root of the problem— the makeup of the board—before selecting a CEO candidate. “CEO selection must take place following a significant board change to be sure shareholders can trust the right decision is made, and the new leader can succeed,” he wrote in a statement.

He has presented three independent candidates to join the board and guide the selection process— Marc Maurer (former On Holding AG Co-CEO), Laura Gentile (former ESPN CMO), and Eric Hirshberg (former Activision CEO and former Deutsch LA Co-CEO and CCO). He also proposed that the board shift from staggered director elections to annual elections for all board members.

“It is clear to the world that Lululemon is special, but in need of change,” he continued. “As I have stated for years, Lululemon needs visionary creative leadership to thrive. The simple truth is that the current board lacks these skills and, as a result, Lululemon is unable to win back the confidence of its critical stakeholders and regain commercial momentum. The nominees I put forward today are the change that is needed to redefine Lululemon and begin this company’s next chapter of success.”

Wilson’s Been Busy

While Wilson has spent a lot of time over the last decade thinking about Lululemon, he’s hardly been idle. In 2019, he bought a 21 percent stake in Amer Sports, parent company of Wilson tennis racquets and the premium outdoor apparel company Arc’teryx, which earned him a board seat. Amer Sports has profited mightily from his contribution. His $1 billion initial investment has nearly tripled in value to $3 billion since Amer Sports filed its 2024 IPO. It hit $5.2 billion in revenues on an 18 percent increase in its first reporting year, and revenues are up 26 percent through the first nine months of 2025, including a 30 percent bump in the third quarter.

Technical apparel, led by Arc’teryx, and outdoor performance, headlined by the Salomon brand, are the key drivers of growth—expected to advance just under 30 percent this year— though ball and racquet sports will grow around 10 percent this year.

Clearly, Wilson is persona non grata when it comes to Lululemon’s board. Seeking to avoid a costly and distracting proxy fight, the company said it will take Wilson’s candidates under advisement. But the board rejects Wilson’s claim that it lacks to competence to lead Lululemon forward.

“Lululemon has a highly engaged and experienced board that is well-equipped to provide effective guidance on the company’s direction and the execution of our growth strategy,” the company said in a statement, and added, “Mr. Wilson has not been involved with the company for a decade, and since his departure, Lululemon has continued to adapt to the marketplace and lead the industry, building one of the most compelling growth stories in retail.”

Yet Wilson would argue that the board continues to look backward at past successes rather than forward, as it should. “A company bereft of a visionary loses its singular voice for product and long-term strategy, a strategy that builds a moat of success. An operations/finance-driven board lacks the moxie to understand the market pulse,” he wrote in the WSJ ad.

Lululemon’s Future

In my opinion, the board should give Wilson’s proposals— and his board candidates—consideration. But as with most public companies, leadership ultimately defers to the numbers. That requires a balance of representing shareholder interests with what Wilson asserts as “relentless focus on innovation, product, culture and customer experience.”

Reclaiming Lululemon’s former position as an innovator doesn’t need more of the same. It needs leadership capable of innovating for the future. Wilson’s message is a blunt reminder of the challenge public boards face today from activist shareholders. I believe that the world doesn’t need another results-only-driven apparel company; it needs a bold new vision. Whether Wilson can influence the company externally, even as the principal shareholder, remains to be seen. If the company wants to “fly again,” as Wilson urges, it will take boldness and courage that is the brand’s soul.

Dillard’s Gets Department Store Retail Right

Pam Danziger — Mon, 15 Dec 2025 05:01:00 +0000

The department store retail sector has been in a death spiral since the turn of the century, now plunging from $232.5 billion in 2020 to $39.6 billion in 2024. Macy’s, the dominant player in the space, has been caught in that vortex. Since peaking at $27 billion and 850 stores after acquiring the May Company portfolio of stores in 2006, Macy’s immediately started a downward slide. A brief reprieve from 2012 to 2014 lifted net sales to $28 billion, then it resumed its downward course.

Dillard’s, by contrast, has held on tight. Its revenues have hovered between $6 billion and $7 billion since 2000, and it’s been remarkably profitable all the while. In fact, in fiscal 2024, with revenues of $6.6 billion, Dillard’s net income of $594 million was a shade higher than Macy’s at $582 million.

Dillard’s family control, financial discipline, a focus on local customers and a refusal to chase scale for its own sake has helped it weather the storm that has sunk so many other department store rivals. Dillard’s understands the business it’s in, whereas others have lost the playbook and lost their way.

Dillard’s isn’t flashy—in certain circles, it’s been called “Dullard’s.” Yet it has remained a safe harbor in an increasingly turbulent retail market that has battered its department store rivals.

Macy’s Misadventures

Back in the day, when the company formerly known as Federated Department Store acquired May Company’s collection of regional department stores and began rebranding them to Macy’s, the move had disaster written all over it.

Marshall Field’s was a veritable institution in Chicago, as was Wanamaker’s in Philadelphia and Hecht’s in Washington, DC. These stores, along with others in the May portfolio, had a loyal and faithful following in their local markets. May operated them as separate divisions and retained their brand names, some going back over a hundred years— Marshall Field’s was founded in 1852, Wanamaker’s in 1861, and Hecht’s in 1857.

Yet, in the name of corporate efficiency, Macy’s thought it knew better. It rebranded the department stores that were deeply embedded in their local communities, to Macy’s, severing local ties—both with customers and employees— and ultimately delivering a death blow to many of those stores.

In 2006, when the Macy’s rebrand was complete, the department store sector brought in $213.2 billion. Last year, the sector shrank to less than $40 billion—a mere shadow of its former self. Macy’s has continued this fall, as well. Through the third quarter, Macy’s department store net sales were off 2.8 percent, largely attributed to store closings. Currently, Macy’s operates about 450 stores, and more closures are planned for 2026. The point is that a business can’t shrink its way to growth. Despite an inkling of good news in the third quarter—comp sales were up 2 percent—Macy’s Inc. is guiding on year-end total revenues between $21.48 billion and $21.63 billion. That is against the $23 billion generated in 2024.

Dillard’s on a Different Track

By contrast, Dillard’s has been effectively and profitably rolling along. Though the company has been publicly traded since 1969, the Dillard family owns the largest share of Class B stock, giving them a dominant voting block and effectively keeping control of the company.

Dillard’s faces the same challenges as Macy’s in the department store sector, but on a smaller scale. With 272 stores, including 28 clearance centers, its revenues in 2024 were $6.6 billion. Dillard’s also owns a construction business, called CDI, which generated $264 million, or 4 percent of corporate net sales, in 2024.

“Disruption in our industry and evolving consumer behaviors were continuing themes in 2024,” chairman of the board and son of the company’s founder, William Dillard II, wrote in the annual report. “Retailers reported mass store closures, bankruptcies and realignments, making it difficult to believe in the future of our sector at all. But Dillard’s is different.”

That is an understatement.

Family Connections

There’s no question that Macy’s Inc. CEO Tony Spring is a skilled and talented executive with deep ties to the company, having come up through the ranks at Bloomingdale’s. He is also a breath of fresh air compared to previous leadership. GlobalData’s Neil Saunders said that before Spring’s arrival, “Macy’s seemed to be a business that was content to sit back and accept its fate as a fading icon of retail.”

But Spring has a sprawling empire to run, including 680 store locations and 95,000 employees, across three distinct segments—general merchandise at Macy’s, luxury in Bloomingdale’s and beauty in Bluemercury.

Alternatively, Dillard’s leadership can focus on one retail operation, which is primarily centered on fashion and beauty; less than five percent of Dillard’s revenues are in home/furniture compared to 15 percent for Macy’s. It can also attend to a narrower band of customers located in the South and Midwest regions of the country. Plus, its senior executives have Dillard in their blood. President Alex Dillard and executive vice president Mike Dillard are the sons of the founder, and executive vice president Drue Dillard Matheny is his daughter. Mike oversees operations, and Drue heads up merchandising and product selection.

The word used most often to describe the Dillard family is “conservative,” both in politics and the business realm. Dillard’s isn’t a first mover, and it doesn’t take big swings. Instead, it has built a reputation as a steady performer, studying the field and learning from others’ mistakes. Staying the course and sticking to its knitting has proven a winning long-term strategy, even as the department store sector has imploded. Customers, in turn, reward Dillard’s for its reliable consistency.

Community Centricity

Since its founding in 1938, Dillard’s has maintained its steadfast commitment to the customers in their communities, something that Macy’s forfeited when it rebranded its stores. Another department store that has followed a similar community-centric path is Boscov’s, founded in 1914 in Reading, PA and now with 51 stores under the leadership of CEO Jim Boscov, nephew of founder Albert Boscov.

Dillard’s commitment to community retail is reflected in the results of the MIT Sloan Management Review’s Culture 500 survey among corporate employees. The most positive value stated by Dillard’s employees is the “customer,” and their core cultural value is “respect.” Those are the ideal values for any retailer, since retail is first and foremost a people business rather than a product business. That contrasts sharply with the corporate-speak, transactional words from Macy’s employees: “Execution” and “collaboration” are their chief talking points. Primarily focused on serving its local customers’ fashion needs and thinking more like a specialty retailer than a general merchandise department store, Dillard’s keeps close tabs on customers’ preferences, tastes and sizes to tailor assortments specific to each market. And its well-developed private-label program, which provides greater design and pricing control, enables Dillard’s to curate local store selections even more.

“Dillard’s has relatively strong levels of loyalty,” said GlobalData’s Saunders. “It manages to drive good rates of repeat visits. A lot of this comes down to good buying, constant range refreshes, an authoritative offer and pleasant store environments. Taken together, good execution on these things makes Dillard’s a destination worth visiting. And that, in this more constrained environment, makes all the difference.”

Financial Discipline

Dillard’s excels in the retail basics, and most basic of all, is its financial discipline. No matter which way the economic winds blow, it just keeps delivering results. Dillard’s stock has risen 66 percent over the past year and has been on a steady upward trajectory since early April, when it traded just under $300 per share. Currently, it’s nearing $700 per share.

While the family attends to business, making regular visits to the stores, long-time financial heavyweights watch over the money. Principal financial officer Chris Johnson has been with the company for nearly 20 years, and principal accounting officer Phillip Watts is virtually a Dillard’s lifer. Dillard’s results in the third quarter ending November show how they’ve all been minding the store. Total retail sales were up 3 percent to $1.3 billion and comparable sales increased by the same percentage.

Most remarkably, Dillard’s delivered net income of $130 million in the third quarter, compared with Macy’s Inc., which squeaked out net income of only $11 million on revenues of $4.9 billion during the same 13-week time period. And Dillard’s is sitting on a $1.2 billion war chest of cash and equivalents that gives it control of its destiny.

That capital enabled Dillard’s to make an unexpected but shrewd move in August. It bought the 646,000-square-foot Longview Mall with property developer Trademark Property Co for an undisclosed sum from Washington Prime Group. Dillard’s has long been an anchor tenant in the mall located outside Longview, TX, east of Dallas and about 60 miles from Shreveport, LA. Trademark will manage operations and leasing in the mall. Dillard’s owns over 90 percent of its 46.3 million-square-foot footprint.

Sticking to the Fundamentals

In a retail world where rivals chase the latest trends and frequently flounder, Dillard’s has thrived by sticking to the basics. Family control, customer-focused merchandising, disciplined in-store execution and tight financial controls are its superpowers.

“Dillard’s has a good grip on operations and is very well managed,” Saunders remarked, as he stressed that Dillard’s has mastered the ability to get shoppers to buy across multiple departments to enlarge its share of the customers’ wallet. “In theory, this is something all department stores should be doing—but too many still fall short.”

Dillard’s isn’t flashy—in certain circles, it’s been called “Dullard’s.” Yet it has remained a safe harbor in an increasingly turbulent retail market that has battered its department store rivals. Dillard’s reliability and unwavering commitment to serving its customers are what they value and keep them coming back for more.

“While it is true that Dillard’s isn’t the most ambitious of retailers and would rarely be in the vanguard for initiatives such as agentic commerce, it more than makes up for this by a strict adherence to the basics of retail. These things show through in everything from merchandising to customer service, and they make a genuine difference. This focus will continue to serve Dillard’s well in a choppy consumer economy,” Saunders concluded.

Jens Grede Is a Retail Radical

Pam Danziger — Wed, 19 Nov 2025 05:01:00 +0000

Kim Kardashian has banked the success of her shapewear brand, SKIMS, into a net worth of $1.9 billion to place her at #19 on Forbes’ “America’s Richest Self-Made Women 2025” list, well ahead of Taylor Swift at $1.6 billion. She’s remarkable among the women who are ahead of her on the Forbes list, being the youngest at 44 years and the only woman who made her fortune in fashion.

Shape Shifter

Kardashian’s celebrity status gave her a distinct advantage and fast-tracked the brand’s success. Still, the company’s $5 billion valuation couldn’t be achieved on fame alone. The products had to deliver what consumers wanted, and the company needed an operational leader with proven business acumen. SKIMS CEO and company co-founder Jens Grede is pure business, as is his wife Emma Grede, who works alongside him as SKIMS chief product officer. Kardashian and the Gredes control a majority stake in the brand.

Grede has helped Kardashian and SKIMS transcend a celebrity brand to a meaningful business with quality products. Given Grede’s business expertise and managerial experience—evident in his success with Frame Denim (launched with Erik Torstensson), The Wednesday Agency Group (later acquired by Omnicom), and Tom Brady’s athletic wear line, Brady—SKIMS is well positioned to grow beyond its shapewear foundation into a lifestyle brand that blends fashion, beauty, and wellness, leveraging Kardashian’s celebrity and his operational know-how.

“SKIMS has fame, sure, but what Jens Grede is doing is turning all that energy into something real and lasting. He builds with discipline and intuition, with the kind of focus that keeps a brand grounded while it grows. That’s what makes him a retail radical. He’s not chasing the spotlight; he’s shaping what it shines on.” Says Matthew Cyr, Founder & CEO of Crave.

Kim Kardashian is the brand’s guiding force, as well as creative director. “She’s unbelievably involved every single day in making the product experience exactly what she wants it to be, and my role is more to facilitate that,” says CEO Jens Grede.

Origin Story

Emma, Jens’s business and life partner, brought him into the Kardashian orbit. After she met Kim’s mother, Kris Jenner, through her fashion PR and marketing work with The Wednesday Agency Group, Emma helped Khloé launch her Good American denim brand. The couple got closer to the Kardashian clan after moving to Los Angeles in 2015 from the U.K., Emma’s homeland and Swedish-born Jens’ adopted country.

“When I met Kim and she showed me what her early ideas around SKIMS were, I wasn’t looking for a project,” Jens said. “I had no interest in starting another business, but when I saw it, I couldn’t unsee it. I just had a gut feeling that what she was showing me was something that I had to help bring to reality.”

In those early days, he sensed an opportunity to disrupt the women’s undergarment space, dominated by Victoria’s Secret and a handful of department store brands that were all trending downwards. “It was a very stale market that was ripe for disruption, and Kim felt the same way,” he said. They put their heads together to develop the concept over some three years and launched SKIMS online as an exclusive direct-to-consumer brand in September 2019. It proved to be an opportune time to introduce the brand, as the pandemic’s store closures forced people to shop online, and it gave SKIMS an early opportunity to expand horizontally beyond shapewear into loungewear.

The brand’s DNA was centered around size and color inclusivity, offering a much wider range of matching skin tones than other undies brands. It also leveraged Kardashian’s social media following by dropping limited new product releases within a narrow time window, resulting in FoMO sellouts that often occurred within 24 hours.

Ready for Disruption

In calculating SKIMS’ upstart opportunity, Grede observed that “Big brands, like Victoria’s Secret, tend to be too focused on what they are doing, not necessarily what the customer needs. They also tend to be less innovative and develop more slowly in response to what’s happening in customers’ lives.”

He tips his hat toward the innovation that Spanx introduced into shapewear, “They make a wonderful product,” he said. But, Grede believed that advances in fabric technology could offer more comfort into the category. He also saw an opportunity to evolve traditional shapewear, which was designed to compress and contain, in garments that accentuate and celebrate the female form, as most effectively modeled by Kim. “We don’t want to live in a world where there’s only one option,” he said. “We saw an opportunity to cater to a different customer who needed something slightly different from our product.”

Kardashian is the brand’s guiding force, as well as creative director. “She’s unbelievably involved every single day in making the product experience exactly what she wants it to be, and my role is more to facilitate that,” Grede said. The company has achieved a comfort level in shapewear unmatched by any other brand through an innovative blend of quality fabrication and knitting techniques that provide for four-way stretch.

SKIMS has followed the same rigorous design philosophy it applied to shapewear to expand into a wide range of products, including women’s bras and panties, loungewear, swimwear, sleepwear, socks and slippers, activewear, and men’s underwear, as well as tanks and tees.

Major Milestones

Through four investment rounds, the most recent led by Goldman Sachs netted $225 million, SKIMS just reached a $5 billion valuation, a remarkable feat after less than six years in operation, that puts it on equal footing with Victoria’s Secret.

Even more remarkable, SKIMS only opened its first store in June 2024 in the Georgetown area of D.C., followed by flagship locations on Sunset Boulevard in West Hollywood and Fifth Avenue in New York City. By comparison, Victoria’s Secret operates just under 800 stores.

SKIMS now has branded stores in major U.S. cities and Mexico City, as well as several outlet mall locations. It has just opened its largest store to date, at 8,000 square feet, in Bloomington’s Mall of America, and has plans to expand to London’s Regent Street in 2026, with Dubai following.

SKIMS has also forged wholesale relationships with Nordstrom, Bloomingdale’s, Bergdorf Goodman, Neiman Marcus and Saks Fifth Avenue. Most recently, it launched a high-profile partnership with Nike under the NikeSKIMS banner. Unlike short-term collaborations, NikeSKIMS will operate as a Nike sub-brand, along the lines of its best-selling Jordan Brand.

“NikeSKIMS is more than a collaboration, it’s a new brand redefining activewear. With this launch, we are establishing a platform to grow NikeSKIMS, reach consumers worldwide and set a new benchmark for how activewear is experienced across retail, digital and cultural touch points,” said Grede.

SKIMS is reported to have broken the $1 billion mark in revenues last year, after nearly doubling revenues since 2022, according to Seeking Alpha. Despite rumors that SKIMS is planning an IPO soon, Grede says the company is in no hurry to go into the public market. “We have never made a decision to go public. All I’ve ever said, and maybe that was a mistake, was that at some point we deserve to be a public company,” he shared with WWD. But he added, “We have institutional investors, so of course, at some point, we need to offer them optionality. But we have long-term investors. They’re incredibly supportive of our journey. And I think as people, both of us would say we are enjoying our time right now. We might make that position in the future, but that’s not what I’m thinking about.”

Radical Results

While it is impossible to put a value on Kim Kardashian’s influence on SKIMS’ overwhelming success, few other celebrity brands have achieved what SKIMS has in six short years.:

Rihanna’s Fenty brands (Beauty and Savage x Fenty) come closest, valued at around $4 billion.
Selena Gomez’s Rare Beauty has an estimated $1.3 billion valuation; it generated less than $400 million in 2023, according to Forbes.
Sister Kylie Jenner’s Kylie Cosmetics, in partnership with Coty, is reportedly worth approximately $1.2 billion.
Hailey Bieber’s skincare brand, Rhode, was acquired by e.l.f. Beauty for $800 million with the potential for another $200 million payout.
Other celeb brands trail far behind. Jessica Alba’s Honest Company is valued at $550 million, and Gwyneth Paltrow’s Goop at $250 million.

Grede understands the power Kardashian plays in SKIMS’ success: “Kim is for an influencer generation,” he said, noting that Nike’s Jordan Brand started that way in 1997, while Michael Jordan was still in the NBA. However, the Jordan Brand continues to grow long after his retirement. It holds the number three spot in sneaker brand market share after Nike and Adidas this year.

Under Grede’s leadership, SKIMS is playing the long game to leverage Kardashian’s cultural capital into a sustainable lifestyle brand and ongoing business. To do that, he keeps focused on the customer and his or her needs, informed by pop culture trends, but not held hostage to them. “It’s not that a brand comes along and then the world shifts or mobilizes around the brand. It’s far more common that the changes are happening and the brand is in the right place at the right time. They say luck is where opportunity meets preparation,” he observed.

Being prepared for the next opportunity is what Grede focuses on, and in true merchant fashion, he believes, “Product is omnipotent. It’s number one, two and three, and everything else we do is just to aid awareness and sell the product.” He follows a traditional retail playbook, ensuring SKIMS provides the right product at the right price in the right places. He describes himself as an objective person who doesn’t get emotionally involved in the decision-making.

Yet, he is acutely aware that customers must feel emotionally connected to the brand for it to keep growing, and he leans into that with emotional intensity. “A lot of founders are in love with their own product, and spend a lot of time wanting to convince everyone why their product is the best in the world, rather than letting people tell them what they think about what they make. So out of the gate, we created a very strong feedback loop with our own community. We didn’t want to lose ourselves in our own house,” he said.

“We’re seeing this fundamental shift in our economy and in capital, from the old economy to the new economy. I truly believe that a brand has to reflect the values of its people. And I think for too long in corporate America, we made the distinction between our beliefs, the company’s beliefs and our customers’ views. I believe that the values of our business should be the values of us, as people. I aim to eliminate the sense of a corporate veil between the customer and the brand. That builds trust, and once you have a customer’s trust, they’re very loyal, super-retentive,” he concluded. That alone makes Grede and SKIMS an iconoclastic Retail Radical.

About the Retail Radicals

The 2025 Crave Retail Radicals Awards include Le Bon Marché, Build-A-Bear Workshops, Pacsun, SKIMS and Sprouts. For the past seven years, we have identified radical thinkers and doers (innovators and entrepreneurial leaders) driving major transformations within their respective retail brands. In a marketplace that is defined by transactions and risk-avoidance, these five retailers have bucked the trend and are helping to transform the industry by rewriting the rules of retail by being bold and brave. Each is a role model for keeping retail relevant and vibrant, and exceeding expectations experientially and financially.

Brieane Olson is a Retail Radical

Pam Danziger — Wed, 05 Nov 2025 05:01:00 +0000

Retail radicals think in radically different ways about the business of retail and is more about mindset than method. There is often a subtlety to radical thinking, and the radical is just beneath the surface. Such is the case of Brieane Olson, CEO of Pacsun.

Pacsun’s Rise and Fall

At first glance, Pacsun is just another mall-based, youth-focused fashion retailer. Founded in 1980 as Pacific Sunwear of California – better known as Pacsun – its original mission was to outfit teens from coast to coast in California surf and skate style. It successfully rode that wave, going public in 1993 and reaching some 1,300 stores.

But as fashion trends shifted and mall traffic declined, the wave eventually fizzled out, leaving Pacsun to file for bankruptcy in 2016 with fewer than half the stores at its zenith. The company was promptly acquired by Golden Gate Capital, which aimed to steer it back on course. Since then, Pacsun has downsized to around 300 stores and shifted its focus toward streetwear and casual lifestyle offerings.

Olson understands that retail is first and foremost a people, not a product, business, a principle she lives by to guide Pacsun and her team into the future: “At Pacsun, innovation is a mindset and a strong part of our culture. We empower our teams to experiment, take risks, and bring forward ideas that push us into new territory. We listen closely to our community of Gen Z and Gen Alpha consumers and see them as co-creators.”

Catching the Next Wave

All the while, Olson was working in the Pacsun trenches, having joined the company in 2007 as women’s design director, after experience with J. Crew and Abercrombie & Fitch, as well as in the luxury fashion sphere with Valentino and Hollywould.

At Pacsun, she found her footing and began a steady climb up the corporate ladder, becoming president in 2021, then transitioning to CEO in April 2023. Over the years, she successfully navigated the highs and lows of Pacsun’s evolution, cultivating a radical retail mindset.

Pacsun is back in growth mode, opening ten new stores this year and 25+ in 2026. It has successfully navigated the minefield when a fashion brand’s target market transitions from one generation to another. Now it is firmly established with Gen Z and leaning into Gen Alpha. It is utilizing all the tools in the technology playbook that these two digitally-native generations expect, including AI, TikTok and social commerce.

But most remarkable – and radical – is how Olson has developed the habit of listening – really listening – to Pacsun’s current and prospective customers and has institutionalized the process to guide decision-making, from the product level to the boardroom. She says she is most proud of “the trust Pacsun has with the next generation. That trust doesn’t come lightly. It’s earned by showing up authentically, listening, and taking risks alongside them. Launching initiatives like our Youth Advisory Council and Youth Report by Pacsun reaffirmed that we’re talking about youth culture and we’re building it in collaboration with young people themselves. Seeing our teams, our creators, and our consumers align around purpose is incredibly rewarding.”

The Cultural Conversation

Pacsun’s evolution under Olson’s leadership has included collaborations with powerful influencers like Kendall and Kylie Jenner, visionary designers such as Willy Chavarria and Reese Cooper, and iconic brands, including Wrangler, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Major League Baseball, and Ford.

More recently, the brand has embraced co-creation through the Pacsun Collective—a group of “ringers,” including content creators, photographers, stylists, designers, musicians, and artists, recruited to join Pacsun’s internal team to launch collections described as “the intersection of culture, sports, music, art, and fashion.”

And most recently, it has established a Youth Advisory Council, made up of Gen Z and Gen Alpha tastemasters, including Anna Sitar, Jabari and Malik Williams, Life.w.Bex, Valera Djordjevic, Teala Dunn and Anais and Miabelle Lee, Shea Durazzo, Sienna Lewis, Mark Aoki and Melody Hurd, to further guide the company to keep in step with the rapidly changing needs and desires of Pacsun’s next generation customers.

Pacsun released “The Youth Report by Pacsun,” based on a survey of 6,000 respondents aged 11 to 24 years conducted by GlobalData, that, in a radical commitment to transparency and community building, the company is sharing with other retail brands and cultural stakeholders Olson described her role as stewarding the next generation of consumers not just selling to them; that’s radical thinking not typical leadership hubris.

“Pacsun has always centered young people in everything we do, and that means listening deeply to Gen Z and Gen Alpha and sharing what we learn along the way, too,” she explained. “Pacsun has adopted a stewardship role towards young people – this is why we designed The Youth Report as an open resource to provide meaningful takeaways that help others engage, uplift, and celebrate these generations and honor their voices.”

People Before Product

Olson understands that retail is first and foremost a people, not a product, business, a principle she lives by to guide Pacsun and her team into the future: “At Pacsun, innovation is a mindset and a strong part of our culture. We empower our teams to experiment, take risks, and bring forward ideas that push us into new territory, whether that’s social commerce, AI in retail, or creator-led collaborations,” she said.. “We listen closely to our community of Gen Z and Gen Alpha consumers and see them as co-creators. That feedback loop, between our associates, our creators, and our customers, keeps us nimble, curious, and consistently ahead of cultural shifts,” she adds, ““To formalize this, we host quarterly Think Tank session where employees at every level can pitch new ideas, we look to our Youth Advisory Council for real-time consumer insights, and we work with our Pacsun Collective to co-develop campaigns and products. Together, these programs embed innovation into the fabric of Pacsun and help build the brand alongside our community.”

Iconoclastic Leadership

Olson is an innovator and risk-taker. She says, “Being radical is about refusing to accept the ‘way it’s always been done.’ Retail is an industry in constant transformation, and young people expect brands to take stances across product, values and purpose. “For Pacsun, being radical means embracing disruption as an opportunity, from leaning into social commerce and live shopping, to collaborating with creators as designers, to reimagining our stores as cultural hubs, to integrating AI into how we serve our customers. “It’s about reimagining what’s possible in retail and never losing sight of the responsibility that comes with cultural relevance.”

Matthew Cyr, Founder & CEO, Crave Retail, says, “As someone who grew up with PacSun, I’ve seen the brand go from a mall staple to a modern movement. Brieane Olson didn’t just rebuild it—she re-energized it. Her leadership reminds us that retail at its best listens to culture, moves with it, and adds something back. That’s the mark of a retail radical.”

Radical thinking helps play a role in shaping a better future for retail. Olson explains, “I see the future of retail as borderless, both digitally and physically. The lines between content, community, and commerce are disappearing. Stores are becoming experience centers where culture, product, and purpose meet. “Shopping is increasingly social and creator-driven, with youth leading the way in how brands show up, especially online and on social platforms. For Pacsun, it means building an ecosystem where young people shop with us and create with us.”

A Radical Mindset

Brieane Olson’s leadership at Pacsun reveals that being radical in retail isn’t about rebellion—it’s about reimagining the future of retail with purpose, agility, and empathy:

Challenging convention: Question legacy practices and reimagine what retail can be – not just what it has been.
Listening deeply: Build systems that institutionalize listening to your customers, creators, and employees at every level.
Co-creating with community: Invite your audience to help shape your brand – from product design to cultural direction.
Embracing disruption: View technological and generational shifts as opportunities, not threats.
Leading with purpose: Align your brand with values that resonate with your audience and reflect their lived experiences.
Building trust through transparency: Share insights, data, and decisions openly to foster loyalty and cultural credibility.
Designing for experience: Reimagine stores and digital platforms as immersive hubs where commerce meets culture.
Empowering experimentation: Encourage risk-taking and idea-sharing across all levels of your organization.
Stewarding the future: See your role not just as a seller, but as a guide for the next generation of consumers and creators.

Her advice to the next generation of retail leaders? “Stay curious, stay resilient, and don’t be afraid to take risks. Retail is one of the most dynamic industries. It will challenge you daily, but it will also give you a front-row seat to cultural change. Your fresh perspective is your advantage. Speak up, listen closely to your peers and customers, and understand that retail today is about so much more than selling clothes. Retail is about storytelling, creating experiences, building community, leading with purpose, and much more.

In a retail landscape of constant reinvention, Olson is a poster child for the radical mindset that listens not just hears, fearlessly embraces the inevitable ups and downs, and leads with purpose to overcome obstacles and rise to the challenges.

About the Retail Radicals

The 2025 Crave Retail Radicals Awards include Le Bon Marché, Build-A-Bear Workshops, PacSun, Skims and Sprouts. For the past seven years, we have identified radical thinkers and doers (innovators and entrepreneurial leaders) driving major transformations within their respective retail brands. In a marketplace that is defined by transactions and risk-avoidance, these five retailers have bucked the trend and are helping to transform the industry by rewriting the rules of retail by being bold and brave. Each is a role model for keeping retail relevant and vibrant, and exceeding expectations experientially and financially.

Gen Z Is Resetting Retail Spending

Pam Danziger — Mon, 29 Sep 2025 04:01:00 +0000

Many retailers are uncomfortable, sitting on pins and needles as they anticipate the fourth-quarter holiday season. Retail has exceeded all expectations through August – total retail, including food services, is up 3.8 percent and 4.3 percent — if automobiles, the largest spending category, and gasoline stations, the most volatile, are removed. The threat of tariffs driving prices higher as the year progresses is ever-present and has everyone on edge. My TRR colleague Warren Shoulberg has weighed in on the paradox of retail growth. I’m going to focus on holiday.

Zoomers will take the lead to create more meaning in their holiday celebrations this year because they feel the weight of the modern American lifestyle more acutely than any other generation. A McKinsey health study found Gen Z has the least positive life outlook, including lower levels of emotional and social well-being and higher rates of anxiety, depression, and distress than any other generation.

Tepid Holiday Season

McKinsey reported the U.S. is “settling in for a tepid holiday season.” A significant difference between the 4,000 adult consumers polled who plan to spend less (23 percent) compared to those who plan to spend more (19 percent) over the holiday season. Many shoppers plan to favor necessity-driving purchases, e.g., food, baby and pet supplies and gasoline, with “noticeable cuts” in what they term semi-discretionary purchases, such as personal care products, vitamins and supplements, toys and household supplies.

However, the sharpest declines are reflected in discretionary categories, including travel, personal care and home improvement services, jewelry, apparel and footwear, electronics and accessories. “This underscores a broader, cautious approach to spending as economic pressures continue to shape consumer behavior,” McKinsey reports.

The report also hints at “generational shifts” impacting retail results, but unfortunately, it doesn’t go into depth about those shifts, other than to mention that millennials will be the most proactive in early holiday shopping and Gen Z the most likely to wait until Black Friday to get their holiday shopping started.

Zoomers’ hesitation to start shopping early is likely caused by the challenging economic conditions the adults in this group face. The 69 million-strong Gen Z cohort, born between 1997 and 2012 (ages 13 to 28 years), is still coming of age as consumers. However, the leading-edge Zoomer adults are advancing into their earnings prime and developing spending habits that will likely carry on into their maturity. Unfortunately, this group has been the hardest hit by the shrinkage in the job market.

Cautious frugality may be the key words to describe their current perspective, given the life-threatening pandemic crisis they faced during their developmental years and the economic upheaval that resulted from it.

Striving for Financial Security

Gen Z adults face particularly challenging financial prospects. They come burdened by significant student loan debt, uncertain job opportunities, stagnant wages and rising costs for rent, groceries and other necessities after several years of soaring inflation. As a result, nearly three-fourths of Zoomers have taken steps in the last year to improve their financial status, including making a budget (64 percent), putting more money into savings (51 percent) and paying down debt (24 percent), according to a Bank of America survey among 1,000 Gen Z adults (18 to 28 years) conducted by Ipsos. In addition, nearly two-thirds (64 percent) are taking steps to reduce spending; 41 percent have cut back on dining out, and 23 percent are shopping at more affordable grocery stores. Walmart, Aldi and Costco are reaping the rewards.

As Zoomers climb the ladder to the “good life,” the ascent keeps getting steeper with new rungs suddenly appearing. Over half (53 percent) feel they don’t make enough money to live the life they want, and a majority (55 percent) don’t have enough emergency savings to cover three months of expenses. Holly O’Neil, BOA president of consumer, retail and preferred banking, said, “Even though they’re facing economic barriers and high everyday costs, they are working hard to become financially independent and take control of their money.”

With Zoomer adults taking intentional steps toward better financial health, the McKinsey’s “State of Consumer 2025” survey among 3,000 consumers conducted in May found Gen Z adults are less likely than previous generations to focus on achieving life stage milestones, such as marriage and having children, and “much more” likely to define themselves by financial security, career achievements and accumulating wealth.

Gen Z is known for its impatience in achieving success and wants to fast-track their careers. With their current economic situation they may become more pragmatic, taking a page out of Thomas Stanley and William Danko’s book, The Millionaire Next Door: “Wealth in America is more often the result of hard work, diligent savings and living below your means.”

Monkey-Wrench In Holiday Shopping

Gen Z’s cautious frugality is playing out in PwC’s recently released holiday consumer intentions survey, which found, for the first time since 2020, Americans plan to cut back on holiday spending. Zoomers are the drivers behind the decline. Holiday spending overall is projected to decline by five percent, with gift budgets taking an even sharper hit – slashed by 11 percent, more than double the rate of the broader cutback. PwC calls it a “spending reset,” where consumers are shifting focus to cherished holiday traditions away from material gift-giving. Instead, they’re seeking deeper meaning in how they celebrate –prioritizing connection, experiences, and intentionality over excess.

“We believe people will continue to prioritize holiday rituals and meaningful experiences,” PwC reports, noting that shared experiences are gaining ground for their value, flexibility and emotional resonance. “This behavior signals a pattern: Spending may shift, but the intent to maintain a sense of normalcy holds firm.”

Gen Z Driving the Spending Reset

Looking across the four generations included in the survey sample – 1,000 each among adult Gen Z, millennials, Gen X and boomers – Zoomers are the driving force behind the spending reset. They expect to drop holiday spending by 23 percent this year.

Millennials, the next generation older than Gen Z, the largest generational cohort in the U.S., some 77 million strong, and squarely in the workforce, are more optimistic expecting to hold back planned spending by only one percent.

Cautious holiday spending by these two generations, especially for gifts, could play havoc on retailers’ fourth-quarter results. Overall, the PwC survey found that more than 80 percent of the consumers surveyed across all generations plan to cut back on spending over the next six months, citing rising prices, new tariffs, and the higher cost of living.

Time for a Change

Net/net: Retailers can expect shoppers to be looking to economize more when selecting gifts this year. Yet, the most meaningful gifts don’t necessarily come from a store, but from the heart. A handwritten letter, a shared memory captured in a photograph or a handmade item crafted with love carries more meaning. And the greatest gift of all is simply to spend time together – engaging in family traditions or creating new ones that deepen connection and joy.

Zoomers will take the lead to create more meaning in their holiday celebrations this year because they feel the weight of the modern American lifestyle more acutely than any other generation. A McKinsey health study found Gen Z have the least positive life outlook, including lower levels of emotional and social well-being and higher rates of anxiety, depression, and distress than any other generation. Imagine the irony: Gen Z may be the ones to lead the way to more meaningful holiday celebrations this year, governed by financial discipline and cautious spending. And the spending habits they are developing in their formative years are likely to be carried on as they mature.

In the short term, this shift may unsettle retailers and consumer brands. But Gen Z is still emerging as a consumer force. Of the roughly 69 million Zoomers in the U.S., only about 45 million have reached adulthood. They account for about 25 percent of the population, but currently only around 15 percent of spending. This gives brands a window of opportunity to understand their values and evolve accordingly.

While it is impossible to predict exactly how Gen Z will reshape the marketplace, once they take center stage, one thing is certain: they will bring profound change. The question isn’t if, but when. And smart brands must be preparing now.

Collectible Dolls Are Reborn

Pam Danziger — Wed, 27 Aug 2025 04:01:00 +0000

Ever since the Pop Mart Labubu craze erupted, I’ve been having déjà vu from the 1990s Beanie Babies fad. Back in the day, there was a whole industry built around manufactured collectibles, and I was part of it, working for the industry’s leader during its heyday, The Franklin Mint.

There is no age limit for doll collecting. In fact, it tends to grow with age. Among doll collectors, kids’ rooms abandoned during the empty-nesting years are repurposed as doll nurseries. And the growing kidulting trend, where adults aged 18 and above revert to or continue on with their play toys, will bring younger doll collectors into the fold.

Collecting, Reborn

However, there are big differences between then and now. Collectible dolls (Madame Alexander, Barbie, Franklin Mint, and Robert Tonner) were the big thing before Beanie Babies arrived on the scene. For the record, both Beanie Babies and Labubu are classified as plush, not dolls. Then, following a spectacular rise, Beanie Babies crashed and burned when the new century arrived; soon after, the collapse of Beanie Babies brought the entire collectibles industry down, dolls and all. The Franklin Mint went bankrupt in 2003.

Today, Pop Mart is ushering in a new collectibles era, and while history predicts that the Labubu fad won’t last, it’s going to be a fun ride for Pop Mart and the other players that take advantage of the reignited collecting passion. The last time plush marked the end, not the beginning, of a collectibles boom. This time, plush heralds the beginning of a new collecting surge that will carry over into dolls.

We’re already seeing the beginnings of it as women embrace reborn dolls – collectible baby dolls that look and feel like the real thing. And it’s spun off a business for reborn doll clothes and accessories. Amazon sells a wide range of reborn dolls under $50. Ashton Drake, which has been around since 1985 and stayed in business after the collectibles industry crash, sells them starting around $50 and going up to $250. But according to the Wall Street Journal, one-of-a-kind reborns can go for $8,000 or more.

Collect or Play?

According to the Toy Association, the U.S. play doll market has had a rough ride since 2021. Play doll sales, as measured by Circana’s checkout sales data, dropped just over 30 percent from 2021 to 2024, from a reported $3.9 billion to $2.7 billion. However, because Circana tracks only about 70 percent of the total market, the U.S. play doll market totaled an estimated $4 billion last year and declined 8 percent from 2023.

Plush, by contrast, grew nearly 40 percent, from an estimated $2.8 billion in 2021 to $3.9 billion in 2024, and that was before Labubus hit. Through the first half of 2025, Pop Mart’s revenues have risen over 200 percent to nearly $2 billion.

The global collector doll market totalled $13 billion last year and is expected to reach $14 billion in 2025, up about 7 percent over 2024. The U.S. holds a one-third market share, putting it at roughly $4.3 billion last year and $4.6 billion this.

While the play doll market is going down, collector dolls are going up. That’s attributed partly to girls outgrowing their interest in play dolls faster – between ages 6 and 8, girls’ play starts to evolve, and by ages 9 to 12, they’ve largely moved on.

However, there is no age limit for doll collecting. In fact, it tends to grow with age. Among doll collectors, kids’ rooms abandoned during the empty-nesting years are repurposed as doll nurseries. And the growing kidulting trend, where adults aged 18 and above revert to or continue on with their play toys, will bring younger doll collectors into the fold.

The collectible doll market has another advantage: it is not at the mercy of the latest fad and trend, unlike the toy doll market. The collector doll market is reliably steady and projected to grow at a compound annual growth rate of around 6.9 percent through 2033.

Barbie: Queen of Play Dolls for Collectors

There’s clearly an overlap in the play and collectible market with Barbie being the crossover favorite. Mattel estimates there are well over 100,000 avid Barbie collectors and 90 percent are women, averaging 40 years old. These Barbie collectors tend to purchase more than 20 Barbie dolls per year, and nearly half spend about $1,000 per year on their collections. Mattel produces higher-priced special editions and signature dolls to feed collectors’ passion.

Yet, Barbie’s sales remain highly trend-driven. Mattel reported that in 2021, Barbie generated $903.5 million, then dropped by 14 percent to $776 million in 2022, only to bounce back 8 percent to $840 million in 2023 after the release of the Barbie movie. But the good times didn’t last. Barbie sales fell another 14 percent fall in 2024 to $735 million.

Mattel’s American Girl dolls also have a collector following, though not to the extent of Barbie. However, unlike Barbie, which has roller coasted in sales from 2021 to 2024, American Girl sales have been on a steady declined. American Girl revenues reached $270 million in 2021, dropped to $227 million in 2022 and to $207 million in 2023 (the year Barbie the movie was released). However, in 2024, Mattel folded American Girl results into its North America Dolls reporting segment, effectively hiding its poor performance from prying eyes.

American Girl is primarily a direct-to-consumer brand operating five boutique stores, including its massive experiential New York City flagship, which offers salons (for both dolls and owners), birthday parties, dining cafe, and doll hospital services. During American Girl’s prime about ten years ago, it operated over 20 boutiques, including three international stores. Now it only operates in North America.

Madame Alexander Doll Company is another brand that offers both play and collectible dolls. It is privately owned by Kahn Lucas, a children’s clothing company. Madame Alexander maintains an online website, has limited distribution in specialty toy stores and also sells online on Amazon, Walmart, Target and Barnes & Noble.

Baby Dolls Are Collectors’ Top Pick

While Barbie, American Girl and Madame Alexander fill a niche in the collector doll market, as do antique dolls, the greatest share of collectors go for baby dolls, the so-called reborn dolls segment, valuing realism and the emotional connection.

There are at least as many baby doll collectors as there are Barbie aficionados, maybe even more, since it’s a passion women indulge in privately. Because reborns are so lifelike, the casual observer, even friends and family, can find them slightly unnerving. After attending the recent “Dolls of the World” fair in Greensboro, NC, where 1,500 serious collectors gathered, Wall Street Journal reporter Rory Satran found that for many, reborn dolls offer therapeutic comfort, but this can add to the creepiness factor for those outside the community.

For example, the Apple TV show Servant, produced by acclaimed horror filmmaker M. Night Shyamalan, which ran from 2019 through 2023, elevated the reborn creepiness factor. It followed the story of a couple who lost their infant son. The mother, trapped in her grief, acquired a reborn doll as a substitute baby, convinced it was real, and hired a nanny who played along with the mother’s delusion.

Unlike traditional doll collectors who display their prized possessions and keep the original packaging, reborn collectors actually play with their dolls, dressing them, cradling them and taking them out for a stroll. Earlier this summer, when Brittany Spears announced she’d adopted a baby girl, and a baby carrier was spotted in the background of a video, fans speculated it was actually a reborn doll, which TMZ and E! subsequently confirmed.

Some Girls Never Outgrow Dolls

The Labubu plush collecting phenomenon is sure to fuel a resurgence of doll collecting. While play dolls intended for girls’ play face declining interest, the kidulting trend has shifted the toy industry toward feeding the passion among adult enthusiasts. Collector dolls, especially reborns, will benefit, thanks to their emotional resonance, artistry, and appeal to women of all ages.

This shift signals a more stable and enduring phase for the doll industry, where passion, nostalgia, and personal connection drive growth rather than fleeting trends. As the lines between play and collecting continue to blur, the future of dolls looks more vibrant and synthetically alive than ever.

Aspirationals Compromise Luxury Brands

Pam Danziger — Wed, 23 Jul 2025 04:01:00 +0000

The personal luxury market took a modest downturn in 2024, dropping from €369 billion to €364 billion, including a 1 percent decline in the Americas, according to Bain and Company. That dip wasn’t too alarming, considering the dramatic 26 percent increase since the pandemic. However, Bain has issued a new forecast that predicts the luxury market will retreat up to 5 percent in 2025, making it the first major downturn in the last 15 years, excluding 2020.

For brands and conglomerates, such as LVMH and Kering, that have exposure to both aspirational and legacy luxury consumer segments, it’s essential to do a better job of identifying aspirational consumers and tracking their evolution along their luxury journey toward becoming elite customers. This demands insight into how identity is shaped and reshaped over time. The real differentiator is understanding the deep drivers that anchor someone to a brand, even in times of economic friction.

Short-Term Economic Headwinds, Long-Term Damage

Though the luxury market has long been considered recession-proof, the global downturn of 2008–2009 proved otherwise. And 2025 will be another year of reckoning, especially in the U.S., as the threatened 30 percent tariffs on EU imports take hold; the EU is the primary source for luxury goods in the U.S., the world’s largest luxury market.

Despite economic headwinds, the most brutal blows to the industry may be self-inflicted: Luxury brands have become too reliant on “aspirational consumers,” who are most likely to pull back when times get tough. Even more alarming and significantly more damaging, luxury brands have turned off many of their highest-potential customers because of aspirational marketing strategies. If luxury brands don’t course correct, the focus on aspirationals could jeopardize brands’ long-term prospects far more than any short-term economic downturn, according to a new study from BCG and Altagamma. “In a race for scale, some of the soul of luxury was lost, as much of the industry traded exclusivity for reach, exchanging stability for volatility,” stated BCG senior partner Filippo Bianchi.

Aspirational Marketing Backfires

Since the 2008 global recession, the push to make luxury more accessible has propelled this industry forward. Like the mythic ouroboros symbol – the serpent that eats its own tail – the very strategy that fueled dynamic industry growth has turned against itself.

Based on a survey among 7,000 luxury consumers bolstered by focus groups and in-depth interviews, BCG identified four pain points for the highest potential customers when engaging with luxury brands:

Too much marketing and worse, it’s irrelevant. Some 65 percent feel overwhelmed by brands’ over-communication. Clients estimate that they receive between 40 and 60 messages from brands every month, which they find to be lacking in relevance and personalization. “What they value is not outreach, but tailored interaction—built around their personal context, taste and lifestyle,” Bianchi advises.
Too much product, too little value. Luxury consumers most highly value luxury brands’ craftsmanship and quality, yet 89 percent believe brands are letting their quality standards slide. This has become most noticeable after the pandemic, when luxury brands increased prices by an average of 54 percent, with no discernible improvement in quality or change in design. “Brands must rebuild the perceived worth that has been eroded by industrialization and replace industrial volumes with craftsmanship value.”
Mass-ified shopping experiences. Top-tier clients find retail environments overcrowded and impersonal. Some 80 percent expect brands to provide them with dedicated spaces that offer privacy, calm and high-touch service. “Brands must avoid ‘too much crowd, too little intimacy.’”
Lack of recognition. Seventy percent of high-potential customers feel they aren’t recognized by brands as being the special people they think they are. They expect brands to know them and deliver personalized marketing and retail experiences appropriate for and suited to their high-value worth.

Luxury Crossroads

Bain reports the luxury market lost 50 million customers between 2022 and 2024 but it’s too soon to write them off, believes Chandler Mount, founder and CEO of the Affluent Consumer Research Company. “Much of the slowdown in aspirational luxury comes down to economics. For most aspirational buyers, luxury is a conscious tradeoff. And more often recently, it’s just not winning out,” he said.

BCG defines aspirational consumers as those who spend €2,000 or less per year, and in 2024, they still accounted for approximately 60 percent of the luxury goods market. However, BCG’s survey uncovered the difficulty for brands to meet the needs of both aspirational and top-tier luxury clients simultaneously. What works for aspirationals alienates the top tier. In the short term, luxury brands need to correct the four pain points identified by the highest-potential clients:

Reorient to the highest craftsmanship, quality and value and away from mass industrial processes and questionable worker conditions. This becomes even more pressing now that five luxury brands – Loro Piana, Dior, Valentino, Giorgio Armani and handbag company Alviero Martini – have been implicated for worker abuse and exploitation in the supply chain by an Italian court.
Personalize marketing and outreach to convey meaning, not just to generate transactions.
Invest more deeply in delivering high-touch experiences that build emotional connections and reinforce loyalty.
Build more robust CRM and clienteling systems with sophisticated segmentation models so customers are recognized and rewarded.

“To meet and retain top-tier clients, brands must recalibrate,” BCG’s Bianchi shared. “Not through scale, but precision; not through ubiquity, but intimacy. In doing so, they’ll take a crucial step toward building a strong luxury industry by returning to what made it exceptional in the first place.”

Holistic Approach

Luxury brands can’t abandon aspirational customers altogether. To achieve success over the long term, these brands must continue to cultivate aspirational customers and move them up the ladder. Since aspirationals tend to be younger and have not yet hit their income and wealth prime, brands require a new approach by using insights about aspirationals’ motivations to connect with them, while not alienating those who are already at the top of the luxury pyramid. As revealed in the study, this is a tall order.

All luxury brands must refine their marketing strategies to personalize, whether they be aspirationals or top-tier clientele. A one-size-fits-all approach won’t work. Long-term growth is nurturing each customer with a focus on the highest spenders. “Luxury houses need to invest more deeply in their top-tier customers while reinforcing and rewarding loyalty among long-standing customers. The North Star is lasting emotional relevance,” ACRC’s Mount asserts.

The Aspirational Journey

For brands and conglomerates, such as LVMH and Kering, that have exposure to both aspirational and legacy luxury consumer segments, it’s essential to do a better job of identifying aspirational consumers and tracking their evolution along their luxury journey toward becoming elite customers. “This requires more than just income brackets or demographic data – it demands insight into how identity is shaped and reshaped over time,” asserts ACRC’s Mount. “The real differentiator is understanding the deep drivers that anchor someone to a brand, even in times of economic friction.”

It presents a new set of challenges. “We may be looking at a new aspirational class – one not yet fully defined,” Mount maintains. “Their values, behaviors, and purchasing logic aren’t the same as those from five or ten years ago. For luxury to remain relevant, it needs to evolve alongside them.”

Returning to Luxury’s Core Principles

To effectively meet the evolving needs, desires, and priorities of luxury consumers at every stage of their journey, brands must recognize a profound shift in what luxury means. No longer defined solely by opulence, status, and extravagance, luxury is being repositioned as something more human centered – rooted in authenticity, personal well-being, and emotional resonance. It’s a shift from displaying wealth ostentatiously to communicating values that affirm life and connect with individual purpose.

“Today’s buyers – whether spending €500 or €50,000 – are craving more substance, longevity and personal meaning. They want goods that ‘grow with them,’ tell a story and signal who they are becoming, not just what they can afford. The good news? Brands that adapt now won’t just survive. They will own the future because the new definition of luxury isn’t about reaching more people. It’s about mattering more to the ones who count,” Mount concludes.

Lululemon’s Lawsuit with Costco: Grasping at Straws

Pam Danziger — Mon, 14 Jul 2025 04:01:00 +0000

Now that the headlines have faded, let’s take a closer look at Lululemon and its lawsuit against Costco for allegedly infringing on its patents and protected trade dress by selling look-alike products. The suit explicitly cites dupes of its popular Define jacket (original sells for ~ $128), ABC pant (~$100), Scuba hoodie (~$118) and Hi-Tec Men’s Scuba Full-zip jacket (~$100) that Costco retailed for around $20 or less and sold under the brand names “Danskin Ladies Half-Zip Hoodie,” “Danskin Half-Zip Pullover,” “Jockey Ladies Yoga Jacket,” “Spyder Women’s Yoga Jacket,” “Hi-Tec Men’s Scuba Full Zip,” and “Kirkland 5 Pocket Performance Pant.” Of note: Only Costco is being sued, not the companies that produced the products.

The filing shows pictures of Kate Middleton, Nicole Kidman and Reese Witherspoon wearing Costco’s Define jacket dupes and calls out #LululemonDupes on social media platforms, such as TikTok, where influencers promote copycats.

Lululemon’s chances of prevailing and being compensated for lost profits, receiving royalties and/or unspecified damages are slim to none. In such cases, it isn’t enough to prove product patents or trade dress were copied – and that’s particularly hard where fashion is concerned. The plaintiff must also prove that the offending party intended to trick customers into thinking they were getting the real thing.

Misplaced Energies

This is not Lululemon’s first legal tangle against copycats. In 2021, it sued Peloton over its dupes, which eventually led to a five-year partnership agreement in which Lululemon became Peloton’s primary athleticwear supplier. However, it is apparently the first time Costco has been hit, even though its business model is built on creating dupes that sell for much less than the name brand.

Lululemon’s chances of prevailing and being compensated for lost profits, receiving royalties and/or unspecified damages are slim to none. In such cases, it isn’t enough to prove product patents or trade dress were copied – and that’s particularly hard where fashion is concerned. The plaintiff must also prove that the offending party intended to trick customers into thinking they were getting the real thing.

“There has to be a true attempt by the dupe manufacturer to deceive, and it’s very hard to prove that that intent exists,” shared trademark attorney Karl Zielaznicki with Forbes. “Customers often know that they aren’t buying a $5,000 watch for $100. They know it’s a different, dupe product.”

What is certain is that Lululemon will be paying hefty legal fees if the case proceeds to a jury trial, as requested. The case could also be a major distraction for the Lululemon team, who have much bigger business issues to focus on and more significant competitors than Costco to worry about.

Lulu Descending

Lululemon has recently hit a speed bump. After revenues surged 19 percent in 2023, growth subsided by nearly half to 10 percent in 2024 to reach $10.6 billion. However, it’s in the Americas, especially the U.S., where the troubles are most apparent. Lululemon generates approximately 75 percent of its sales in the Americas and where 60 percent of the company’s nearly 800 branded stores operate.

Revenues in the Americas increased by 12 percent in 2023 and then growth dropped to four percent in 2024, reaching $7.9 billion. In the U.S. alone, with nearly 400 company-operated stores, sales advanced only two percent last year, and comparable sales declined by one percent.

Through the first quarter 2025, ending May 4, global first-quarter revenues grew seven percent, yet it was only able to tweak a two percent uptick in revenue in the Americas. And comparable sales dropped two percent in the Americas, with the decline attributed primarily to reduced foot traffic and lower conversion rates. Unlike in previous quarters, the company didn’t report comp sales by country.

However, CEO Calvin McDonald addressed troubles in the U.S. market during the earnings call. “My sense is that in the U.S., consumers remain cautious right now, and they are being very intentional in their buying decisions,” he said, adding, “We’re definitely not happy about where the growth is in the U.S.”

While the company signaled that it was confident it could ride out the impact of tariffs, it expects some prices to increase as tariffs begin to take effect in the second half of the year. Shortly after the first-quarter earnings call, the company laid off 150 corporate employees at its store support centers, according to RetailDive.

While Lululemon continues to hold its previous 2025 guidance, with revenues advancing from five to seven percent to reach between $11.15 billion and $11.3 billion, the goal of achieving its Power of Three x2 growth plan of $12.5 billion in 2026 appears to be moving further out of reach.

Race to the Bottom

To fight rising Lululemon brand fatigue not just in the U.S. but across the globe, the company has been leaning into a plethora of new styles, but that comes with a cost: markdowns. Jefferies analyst Randy Konik noted, “Management continues to emphasize product newness, but our frequent channel checks suggest these efforts have not resonated broadly with many new designs quickly hitting sales racks. As Lululemon’s core customers shift their spending toward competitors, like Alo and Vuori, the company has broadened its product assortment in an attempt to expand its base, potentially alienating its core audience further.”

During the earnings call, CFO Meghan Frank said the company expected “modestly” higher markdowns as the year progresses. The most recent Jefferies channel check suggests that elevated markdowns are already taking place after visiting the full-price stores in Roosevelt Field and Walt Whitman Shops, and the Woodbury Common Outlet store.

Observing heavily stocked sales racks in full-priced stores and multiple markdowns in products on display at the outlet, Konik said, “This trend, combined with 1Q25 inventory growth of 23 percent vs. just seven percent sales growth, suggests slowing sell-through rates and growing markdown pressure.”

He also notes that Lululemon is leaning more heavily into discount channels – five of the seven new U.S. stores opened last year were outlets. “This strategy is eroding LULU’s brand equity. With core brand momentum already weakening, outlets are looking less like a cushion and more like a long-term drag for the company,” he warned. Currently, the company operates 374 full-price stores and 52 outlets in the U.S.

Konik, who expects the company to be forced to revise guidance downward, concludes, “Rising competition, weakening foot traffic and elevated inventory levels are creating a perfect storm,” adding, “The brand appears to be in decline.” Characteristically, TTR’s contributor Mark Cohen doesn’t mince words. “MacDonald and his team have lost the narrative on yoga/athleisurewear. I think Lululemon is making a big mistake.”

Dupe Culture

Despite Lululemon reporting it gained market share in both the men’s and women’s premium athleticwear market in the U.S., it doesn’t define premium. Given that so many competitors benchmark their prices to come in below Lululemon ’s prices. Vuori tends to run ten to 20 percent below Lululemon’s – it may well have achieved a greater share of a premium market that is shrinking.

The fact is that the luxury market overall is facing similar challenges. It could contract up to five percent this year, according to Bain, and one of the reasons is that luxury brands have upset the delicate balance between price and value. Since the pandemic, they’ve continued to raise prices with no discernible increase in value.

Lululemon appears to have fallen into that trap, giving competitors more room to maneuver with more newness and/or lower prices, especially dupes like those offered by Costco and many others. When it comes to buying dupes, consumers aren’t confused about getting the name-brand product at a ridiculously low price. Instead, they are confused as to why name-brand products cost so much when near-identical products can be produced and sold for so much less.

Savvy shoppers of all incomes and ages search out dupes, but most especially next gen consumers. A study by Northeastern University law professor Alexandra Roberts found that 72 percent of Gen Z and 67 percent of millennials report they sometimes or always buy dupes when available. Not only do they get the thrill of finding a comparable product for less, but they also get a kick out of sharing their finds on social media, which helps spread dupe culture further.

Regardless of how the legal dispute is resolved and Lululemon has a big hurdle to prove Costco violated patents and trade dress protections, social media commentators are overwhelmingly siding with Costco, making Lululemon the ultimate loser. Or as the Business of Fashion reports, “Unlike typical IP battles, Lululemon’s dispute with Costco is playing out in the court of public opinion – where consumers increasingly favour dupes over pricey originals.”

Aging QVC Pins Its Dreams on TikTok

Pam Danziger — Wed, 25 Jun 2025 04:01:00 +0000

Once the company now known as QVC Group had a lot going for it. In 2017, when it acquired HSN to consolidate its lead in the television shopping market, it was number one in video commerce. iMedia, which operated under Evine, ShopNBC and ShopHQ, wasn’t even close and has since gone under. And more significantly, QVC was number three in ecommerce. But that was then, this is now: QVC is hanging on by a thread.

QVC turned its attention to the over-50 crowd in an “Age of Possibility” campaign that launched in April 2024 with a Las Vegas Q50 Summit. It showcased 50 distinguished women of a certain age sharing inspiring stories, including Christina Applegate, Queen Latifah, Naomi Watts, Patti LaBelle, Rita Wilson, Kathie Lee Gifford, Billie Jean King and Martha Stewart.

Trouble in TV Shopping Land

QVC revenues peaked at $12.5 billion in 2020, adjusted for the sale of Zulily in 2023, and have fallen ever since, down to $10 billion in 2024 and off another 10 percent in the first quarter ended March 31. Customer counts have dropped from 11.6 million at the end of 2020 to 7.4 million this year. And most recently, QVC’s share of new customers has fallen by almost half, from 48 percent in 2020 to 25 percent most recently.

Not one product category has delivered positive growth since 2023. Electronics has been the biggest loser, dropping 20 percent in 2023, 13 percent in 2024 and 18 percent in first-quarter 2025. Home – QVC’s largest reporting segment with just under 40 percent of sales – along with apparel, and jewelry sales declined by low single digits throughout 2023 and 2024. However, in the first quarter this year, both home and apparel sales losses increased to 9 percent, while jewelry sales dropped even further by 21 percent. Beauty and accessories were off by high single digits in 2024, and both have crossed over to low double-digit losses so far this year.

Can’t Change the Tide

QVC bought some time selling off Zulily in May 2023 ending that year with $10.9 billion in revenues and $590 million operating income – but that didn’t hold for long as operating income plunged to an $809 million loss in 2024. So earlier this year it remediated.

In late March, QVC laid off some 900 employees, about 5 percent of staff, and relocated the HSN studio and broadcasting hub from St. Petersburg, FL to QVC headquarters in West Chester, PA.
After a reverse stock split in May this year, it chose to voluntarily delist from the Nasdaq Capital Market effective May 27 and has applied for its stock to be listed on the OTCQB Venture Market.

Even so, Fitch recently downgraded QVC’s credit rating from “B” to “B-.“ It foresees continued “ongoing topline headwinds” and projects revenues to fall another 5 percent this year, which raises “concerns about the timing and degree of long-term operating stability.”

Fitch may be underestimating QVC’s projected decline this year, given its track record of losing customers and not having a pipeline to replace them. Tariffs will also weigh heavily on QVC since nearly 50 percent of its products are sourced from China.

“If tariffs persist at the current elevated levels, it is our expectation the market will likely see lower consumer demand, particularly in discretionary retail,” QVC CFO Bill Wafford said in the first quarter earnings call. While it pursues finding new sources of supply and negotiations with vendors, QVC prices are bound to increase as the year progresses.

QVC Is Showing Its Age

Although QVC maintains that its customer base includes shoppers of all ages, its core demographic remains middle-aged women. The common perception is that TV shopping is a pastime for older folks. Accepting, even admitting to that reality, QVC turned its attention to the over-50 crowd in an “Age of Possibility” campaign that launched in April 2024 with a Las Vegas Q50 Summit. It showcased 50 distinguished women of a certain age sharing inspiring stories, including Christina Applegate, Queen Latifah, Naomi Watts, Patti LaBelle, Rita Wilson, Kathie Lee Gifford, Billie Jean King and Martha Stewart.

“QVC has a longstanding relationship serving the 50+ customer, and we’re uniquely positioned to launch this dedicated effort that we hope will spur a cultural shift in attitude and behavior towards women over 50,” said Annette Dunleavy, QVC vice president of brand marketing, as she explained that after age 50, women feel largely invisible in the marketplace.

Specifically, a survey conducted by YouGov among nearly 4,000 women found that only 31 percent of women aged 50-to-70 feel supported by brands, compared to nearly 60 percent of women between the ages of 18 and 29 and 41 percent of women aged 30-49.

“QVC is making it our mission to champion women over 50 and build a community and platform where they can come together to share their experiences and celebrate who they are. We are proud to be one of the first mainstream brands stepping up in this way to show dedicated support and celebration for this chapter in women’s lives,” she continued.

It sounds like a worthy cause, but it clearly didn’t move the needle in sales, so QVC came back with a reboot in May. This time, the Age of Possibility event took place in Santa Monica, CA, and it was livestreamed on TikTok. It also focused more on the possibilities of QVC shopping than on the existential possibilities of aging. Yet, if generating sales to women over 50 was the goal, TikTok was an odd choice as a streaming partner. Some 70 percent of TikTok users are under 35, and a mere 14 percent are 45 years and older.

QVC’s Live Streaming

Video streaming is upending traditional cable and broadcast media; Nielsen reports streaming is the top choice for American viewers, used by 44 percent of households in April 2025, against 25 percent for cable and 21 percent for broadcast television. QVC is eyeing live-streaming social commerce as its path to the future with TikTok as its premiere chosen partner. That said, it currently has a QVC Live platform on Facebook and plans are in the works to extend QVC live streaming across YouTube TV, Hulu and Netflix.

QVC first launched on TikTok Shop in August 2024 and now claims some 74,000 TikTok creators have featured QVC items on their shoppable videos and livestreams. It also offers original content created exclusively for TikTok Shop, unlike on Facebook, where it repurposes its regular broadcast segments.

“We are uniquely suited to bring our large-scale, high-volume, live social shopping experience to TikTok,” QVC CEO David Rawlinson II shared, adding that QVC is the original innovator of live shopping and produces more live shoppable content than anyone else – some 49,000+ hours per year. Our agreement [with TikTok] will be a catalyst to transform shopping and discovery, not only for QVC Group but also for social shopping at large,” he continued. As social media channels go, TikTok ranks as the world’s fifth largest, behind, in reverse order, WhatsApp, Instagram, YouTube, and Facebook at number one.

TikTok’s Uncertain Future

Since TikTok Shop launched in the U.S. in September 2023, Capital One reports that Americans spend an estimated $32 million per day shopping on TikTok. Overall, TikTok Shop’s gross merchandise value reached $33.2 billion globally, with the U.S. being its largest market, accounting for approximately $9 billion in GMV.

Of course, Congress passed a law, and the Supreme Court upheld a ban on TikTok in the U.S. unless Chinese-owned ByteDance sells the platform to an American company. President Trump issued an executive order extending the ban timeline, but a deal has yet to be made.

Despite the uncertainties surrounding TikTok’s future, QVC remains optimistic. “While we can’t speculate on the exact outcome between the U.S. government and TikTok, we believe there will be a path forward for TikTok in the U.S., given that 170 million people use the platform,” a QVC spokesperson shared with me.

Losers Win

Overseeing QVC’s growth strategy across social selling, streaming, and digital is Alex Wellen, the newly appointed president and chief growth officer. Wellen, who holds a law degree from Temple University, brings a wealth of media experience, most recently CEO of MotorTrend Group, and before that, 13 years with CNN and two as executive producer with the New York Times. But Wellen has no retail experience, just like Rawlinson, who joined QVC from NielsenIQ.

Perhaps in the world of live-stream social commerce content, how you sell, comes before what you sell. But simply changing platforms from linear broadcasting to social media channels won’t fix the underlying problems at QVC.

In the TV shopping landscape, QVC perfected a winning formula, blending persuasive, well-trained veteran hosts with captivating brand storytellers as guests presenting compelling merchandise. That formula created a genuine connection with the audience and product sales followed.

For example, David Venable, host of the “In the Kitchen with David” show, was QVC’s highest-paid host, earning $500,000 last year. Entrepreneur Kim Gravel serves as both the host of her own Saturday night show and the representative of her $1 billion fashion, beauty, and home business that launched on QVC in 2016. Her brand was the first to sell over $250 million in one year on QVC.

Yet, for every winner like Venable and Gravel, there appear to be more losers, as the company’s numbers indicate. QVC has more work to turn around its business than just switching to live-streaming platforms, like TikTok, as Fitch observed in its recent ratings note: “Its social media platform remains somewhat nascent, and Fitch notes potential execution risks as the company reworks content production and other operations elements to align with new platforms.”

Even in a best-case scenario where QVC successfully manages the social-commerce shift, Fitch expects revenue declines to improve toward low single digits in 2026. That is hardly enough to reverse QVC’s continued downward trajectory.

QVC seems to have lost sight of the “Quality, Value, Convenience” retail formula in a search for trendy new platforms and modern creative content. The fact is quality, value and convenience never get old in retail no matter what platform you choose.

Can an Ad Campaign Revitalize Walmart or JCP?

Pam Danziger — Thu, 19 Jun 2025 04:01:00 +0000

Walmart and JCPenney are launching new advertising campaigns to reintroduce themselves to shoppers and encourage them to think differently about shopping there. Both brands believe they need to update their image, but their challenges and marketing strategies are different.

Walmart’s “Who Knew?” ad campaign launches with wind at the brand’s back. Walmart’s comparable U.S. sales rose 4.5 percent in its latest first quarter of 2026, and ecommerce revenues were up a remarkable 21 percent. However, JCPenney has been in a downward trajectory since 2010 when revenues nearly reached $18 billion and fell to $10.7 billion in 2019 after it went private post-bankruptcy.

Walmart is adding new shopping dimensions to its image, reinforcing that it’s more than just a discount mass retailer but rather an innovative digital retail leader. JCPenney, on the other hand, is focused on optics to change consumers’ minds and convince them to view the 123-year-old brand in a fresh light.

Same Premise, Different Strategies

While neither company refers to these marketing efforts as a rebrand, they effectively serve as one. Both start with the same idea: You thought you knew us, but you don’t. The difference lies in their messaging.

Walmart is introducing a fact-based approach: half a billion products online and express delivery in as little as an hour from its stores no more than ten miles away from 90 percent of U.S. households (Amazon can’t say that). JCPenney is actively trying to change perceptions to get people to give it another look.

JCPenney’s full-scale perceptual shift is a tough challenge. Cognitive biases—including confirmation bias, anchoring bias, and belief perseverance—make it extremely difficult for people to change their preconceived notions. In essence, JCP’s greater challenge is to overcome long-held opinions about its brand rather than expanding consumers’ ideas associated with it.

Walmart’s Bet on “Who Knew?”

Since individuals tend to hold onto their established beliefs, learning something entirely new about a brand is easier than changing what they already think they know. Enter Walmart’s new campaign, “Who Knew?” supporting a subtle logo update in January. CMO William White stated, “Walmart aims to be an inspirational, digital retailer that provides all the products, brands, and services our customers need and want.”

The brand introduced a new wordmark “inspired by Sam Walton’s trucker hat” and what it calls a “modern, custom font that differentiates Walmart from the crowd.” But many social media commentators dismissed the change as barely noticeable, even laughable. “I can’t believe someone got paid for this,” one X user quipped.

After watching the commercial, they may be laughing with Walmart, not at it – the highest achievement for any ad campaign. The campaign is credited to Publicis Groupe’s Leo Burnett, Fallon, Digitas, and Contender advertising agencies, leveraging the happy coincidence of booking an actor literally named Walton to step into the role – the acclaimed star of The White Lotus Walton Goggins.

“Walmart’s new ad campaign is designed to make consumers rethink their perceptions of the brand,” GlobalData’s Neil Saunders shared with me. “It hits all the right notes. It is funny and engaging, uses great actors and its message actually makes people pause and think.”

In a series of four vignettes, the message makes its point. Walmart carries almost anything you could ever want or need in its stores, online and via its app. In addition, a Spanish-language version starring Stephanie Beatriz is also available online. Distribution will extend to TV, out-of-home ads and paid social media, including TikTok TopView. Reddit users will also be able to post their own “Who Knew?” Walmart moments. “The wider point is that the ad is not produced in isolation. It is part of an ongoing mission to broaden the appeal of Walmart, and it highlights tangible changes the company has made on the ground,” GlobalData’s Saunders said. “A low-price message is still at the heart of Walmart, but it is now so much more than this. When it comes to online shopping, Amazon is often the default. Walmart is trying to break this habitual thought pattern and is saying, ‘Look, we’re here – give us a try,’” he added.

Heavier Lift for JCPenney.

JCPenney’s “Yes, JCPenney” campaign arrived in April, taking a cheeky approach with an “apology” to loyal customers: “Not enough people know what you already know.” It continues, “JCPenney is more than just a great deal – it’s home to unbelievable items and incredible fashion at a great deal. That’s why we can no longer keep it a secret.” Ironically, Walmart’s “Who Knew?” slightly manic commercial begins with Goggins relaxing in his home sauna, saying, “You want to know a secret? This sauna is actually from Walmart.”

The “Yes, JCPenney” campaign has much more convincing to do than Walmart’s. JCPenney has been in a downward spiral for the past 15 years and accelerated after the disastrous choice of Ron Johnson as CEO in 2011. Sales continued to fall and stores to close, with the final blow delivered in 2020 with its bankruptcy. It was subsequently acquired by the SPARC Group to form Catalyst Brands earlier this year.

Working in JCPenney’s favor is top marketer, Marisa Thalberg. She’s been inducted into the Forbes CMO Hall of Fame after having been named to Forbes’ “World’s Most Influential CMOs” list five times and Business Insider named her “one of the most innovative CMOs in the world.” Before joining as JCPenney consulting CMO in October 2024 and then joining Catalyst as executive vice president, chief customer and marketing officer in January, Thalberg worked for Estée Lauder, Taco Bell, Lowe’s and SeaWorld/Busch Gardens. However, she is facing her biggest marketing challenge yet at JCPenney: turning around the 123-year-old department store, which is faltering in a steeply declining retail sector.

On April 12, the campaign launched on television in spots highlighting JCPenney’s on-trend fashion. That message was then dropped on Times Square billboards and at local malls, featuring high fashion looks with the copy, “It’s from where?” accompanied by a QR tag that led shoppers to get the answer.

JCPenney was not identified in the ads. The “anonymous ad” concept was created by Mischief, Densu X, FleishmanHillard and VaynerMedia agencies to break through what Thalberg called a “sea of sameness” in retail advertising. “We’re not going to use the same old retail marketing playbook,” she shared with Marketing Dive. “I wanted to be fresh, self-aware and acknowledge that…it’s time for you to get in the know.”

One month after the campaign broke, the company announced that the items featured in the anonymous ads sold out five times faster than the company’s average. There has also been a “major increase” in interest in contemporary fashion this year compared with last, so it expects to double sales volume as the year progresses.

Carrying forward that early momentum, it doubled down on the message in a series of new ads, this time with proper attribution, “Yes, JCPenney,” focused on a price theme, “We’ve got the receipts.” One spot features a woman boarding her flight in a “$250 runway-ready matching set in a bold print for $72.” According to the commercial, she got the reward of a great bargain matched with a “$250 lingering look” from a woman in first class. Ok, we know advertising is aspirational and as much a fairytale as building a retail myth and legend. A $250 runway-ready outfit is a runway far off the beaten designer fashion path.

Riding Tailwinds vs. Battling Headwinds

Walmart’s “Who Knew?” ad campaign launches with wind at the brand’s back. Walmart’s comparable U.S. sales rose 4.5 percent in its latest first quarter of 2026, and ecommerce revenues were up a remarkable 21 percent. However, JCPenney has been in a downward trajectory since 2010 when revenues nearly reached $18 billion and fell to $10.7 billion in 2019 after it went private post-bankruptcy. Most recently, JCPenney laid off 300 warehouse workers in Texas after Catalyst Brands conducted two major corporate layoffs earlier this year affecting five percent followed by nine percent of its workforce.

Headwinds from broader retail trends affect both brands as well as the entire department store sector. The investments in both of these new campaigns have not been disclosed, but one thing is certain: They both spent a pretty penny to transform public perception. Another thing for sure is that JCPenney will have to continue pumping money into its turnaround because changing consumer perceptions is a greater challenge than giving consumers a reason to expand their preconceived notions about Walmart.