Saturday, August 30, 2014

Limited Shelf Life

In business, one of the hardest things is knowing in advance which new products or services are going to maintain strong sales over time. A lot of people lost a lot of money in the late 1990s and early 2000s on the assumption that Beanie Babies would continue to appreciate in value forever, and a lot of people have lost a lot of money over the past three decades by assuming that home computers, the Internet itself, or social media were all passing fads that would soon go away again. It gets even harder when we move into the arts and pop culture, where even a certified platinum hit does not guarantee that a given band will ever have another song on the charts (the world teems with “one-hit wonders”), and a recording act that has been producing under-appreciated albums for twenty years might suddenly leap to prominence. I have to question if it is that hard to imagine that products with no reason for existing except to tap into (and cash in on) a prefabricated teen idol’s popularity might lack staying power, though…

A New York Post article from last week reveals the not particularly surprising news that cosmetics giant Elizabeth Arden is losing money on fragrances linked to both Justin Bieber and Taylor Swift. The reporters suggest that the effect is attributable to both lower-income customers cutting back on luxury items because of the economic situation and also to people getting tired of unpopular behavior on the part of the two celebrities in question (e.g. Bieber’s “bratty antics” and Swift’s “diva routine”). I have to agree that these factors probably do figure into the drop-off in sales of these products, but at the same time I have to note that the majority of pop acts over the past four decades have followed a similar career trajectory, and the percentage is even higher for those individuals specifically developed and groomed by a record company for the purpose (as opposed to naturally-occurring groups of musicians). And the increasing saturation of both the entertainment and cosmetic industries is making this type of failure increasingly common…

Go into any large retail establishment that carries the so-called “celebrity fragrance” products, especially around the holidays, and you will find yourself confronting dozens or hundreds of possible choices, none of which have any particular virtues apart from being endorsed by the particular celebrity whose picture appears on the package. In fact, other than “smell like this celebrity,” most of these products do not even attempt to provide any other selling points. By the same token, in the YouTube era it is possible for dozens (or hundreds) of new performers to appear at any given time, and even if a specific recording artist is able to sell a large number of albums and attract a large following, there is no way of telling how long that success will last – even assuming that the celebrity in question doesn’t do anything objectionable enough to drive his or her fans away…

Now, I don’t mean to suggest that there aren’t recording artists with staying power – the Rolling Stones are well into their sixth decade and showing no signs of stopping, to take the obvious example – or cosmetic products with even longer life spans, like some of the famous Chanel fragrances. But performers and products with that kind of longevity will generally have more to offer than just instant fame from a television show or a sleazy record producer, such as talent or actually smelling nice. In other words, they offer value for the customer’s money. And while there have been occasional exceptions over the years, I don’t think I would want to base my company’s strategy (and ultimately survival) on someone’s ability to catch lightning in a jar repeatedly over time…

No comments: