Comments on: Making Sure Your Brands Don’t ‘Boob’

By: Laurie Morgan

Laurie Morgan — Fri, 22 May 2009 18:30:28 +0000

@Robert:
Would imagine that the difference in pricing for Big&Tall (or petites for that matter) has less to do with the (presumably trivial) cost of extra material and more to do with smaller production scale. Petite items, for example, may require less material, but it’s also the case that they’re not just shrunken versions of regular sizes. They have to be reproportioned for shorter frames, and that means all the setup costs are duplicated but spread over smaller number of customers. Mass market items are cheaper to produce than the sizes on the upper or lower end, especially when they’re marketed separately, since, as CK notes, you then have separate marketing and merchandising costs to consider, too.
Because of this, I don’t think it’s necessarily the case that our presumed and much-publicized collective fattening is going to automatically mean we all pay more. The mass market range is just moving upward; what used to be an outlying group that had to be served separately, at higher cost, is gradually becoming the norm, which can be efficiently served at scale.
Laurie

By: DavidP

DavidP — Tue, 12 May 2009 19:48:57 +0000

They got a lot of free press about this gaff. I’m not so sure it WAS a mistake. This might be chalked up to a brilliant marketing move.

By: CK

CK — Tue, 12 May 2009 16:49:17 +0000

Thanks for the comments, folks.
@Robert: Yes, Big & Tall Men’s Shops do charge more. And here’s another example: so do women’s shops that tailor to petite women! So, both large and small charge a premium for clothing that’s tailored/crafted especially for specific body types. And markets have no problem with this.
Where problems arise is when a shop catering to mass markets–meaning sizes across the board–charges more for a certain size, or in this case, sizes above a certain size. Here’s where feelings get hurt and ire gets sparked– at least that’s what I’m gleaning giving the Marks & Spencer’s example since women felt it was “unjust” (even dubbed their group Busts 4 “Justice”).
And I agree with you that prices will likely be increased across the board and everyone will end up paying more.
@NWGuy: I asked my friend who works in design about how much more fabric is needed for different sizes (as I truly have no clue). She said that between a small and a medium, or even small and large, it’s usually nominal. But that the difference in a small and XL is notable and that’s where the expense comes in. And to your good point (like Big & Tall, or Petite Boutiques), you can charge more through targeted branding– but not in an “all things to all sizes for cheap prices” environ like M&S. That’s where they boobed . Where they did well is with their current campaign (just by note of how much press it’s received as I found out about it through CNN, a major news network vs. finding out through a trade magazine).

By: NFL Trade Rumors

NFL Trade Rumors — Tue, 12 May 2009 16:35:33 +0000

And funny that you just used the word boob! I never thought that that would be the word to explain this but not what I think of it it might just be.

By: Robert

Robert — Tue, 12 May 2009 15:47:40 +0000

2 points I would add:
1. The difference in materials cost for different sizes has always been averaged into pricing. Small people have always been subsidizing big people. The problem is that now we have too many big people and not enough small people subsidizing them. In the end prices will just be higher for everyone.
2. Have you ever shopped the men’s Big & Tall section at a major department store/clothing store? The prices are higher than the regular-sized guys’ clothing. Always has been. This whole thing is ridiculous to me.

By: NWGuy

NWGuy — Tue, 12 May 2009 14:57:55 +0000

CK -
The amazing thing is that the material cost of most goods are not the major driver of pricing. My guess is that the different bra sizes are only fractionally different in cost of materials.
Isn’t the core problem that M&S is a value retailer and attempting to differentiate generic label goods based on sizing? It is easier to differentiate the pricing on different size clothes if you appeal to the consumer through branding. There are specific stores that cater to petite or full-figured ladies, similar to men’s Big&Tall stores. These brands likely get the premium that cannot be gained when you have one brand serving all sizes; side by side in a department store.
M&S failed to realize “just because you can doesn’t mean that you should”.
Thanks for the post.