While the increase in gross profit is significant, even more significant is the impact of volume variances. As the fixed cost remained relatively flat, profit grew.
What Should a Retailer Do?
Cash Out or Double Down?
For many traditional furniture retailers faced with no succession plan, the question is how can I transition out or at least take some “chips off the table”. For retailers under $20 million in sales, the opportunity to find a buyer is a challenge. If younger family members do not want to accept the opportunity, potential buyers are limited. Even those retailers with significant market share are not attractive to larger regional chains that would prefer to build from “ground up,” not only the facility but the culture of the operation. The thought is changing the existing culture of “that is the way we have always done it” to “a new way is not attractive.” There are some exceptions, such as the acquisition of Taft Furniture in upstate New York by Raymour & Flanigan.
At the same time, the acquisition of the Old Brick from the retiring family by Bennington Furniture in Vermont, shows there are potential buyers. The common denominator in these transactions is furniture industry experience and the ability to assess value. Another alternative is an Employee Stock Option Program (ESOP), which several major retailers pursued before the pandemic such as Furniture & ApplianceMart (Boston Inc.), Steinhafels and most recently Woodstock Furniture Outlet.
Andrè Schnabl, principal and managing partner at Tenor ESOP Partners said, “The ESOP provides a very attractive exit strategy for the owners while ensuring that their employees are taken care of, and the founder’s legacy stays intact.” A transaction requires at least 20 employees and EBITDA of $1 million. There is no limit on the upside and no dictate as to how much the owners can sell in the transaction to the ESOP. Also, the structure does not preclude selling to a third party down the road if such an opportunity arises. Schnabl shared some points to consider in his comments on page 13 titled Six Reasons Why a Shareholder of a Private Company Should Consider an ESOP as a Partial or Complete Exit Strategy.
An owner’s perspective to an ESOP is provided by Joe Fonti, chief legal and compliance officer at Furniture & ApplianceMart and Ashley HomeStore. Joe says, “Establishing an ESOP in 2018 was one of the best decisions that my brothers and I have made in business.” He goes on to offer specific reasons it has worked so well for his company. See his owner’s perspective sidebar on page 14.
With these guidelines and the current level of financial performance, a retailer with an EBITDA of 5%-8% could consider an ESOP at a revenue level of $12-$20 million, a great way to take some chips off the table. A myth is that the cost to adhere to the requirement of an ESOP will prohibit profitability going forward. Not true. The cost of a trustee, an annual plan update, and third-party administration is less than $50,000, more than that offset by tax savings. The initial cost is less than $100,000, about 1%-1.5% of the transaction.
Another alternative, the more traditional exit, is the going out of business sale. While the financial results may not be as lucrative, the opportunity to sell existing inventory to the bare walls now exists. Clay Wahlquist, CEO of Wahlquist Promotions, a veteran of this alternative approach since 1992, provided his perspective. According to Walquist, “The problem I’m seeing now is, dealers that didn’t have sufficient reserves are having trouble giving deposits back. This is pushing their backs to the wall. And again, without having a reliable source for consistent inventory, there is no way to generate revenue.”
The opposite of closing is that of selling the company as an ongoing enterprise. We asked Bo Stump, partner at Stump & Company, his perspective on this opportunity. He sees several trends emerging for investment in or acquisition of smaller traditional furniture retailers under $100 million, and especially under $50 million. According to Stump, “Owners are aging out with no exit strategy. ESOPs are an alternative but have problems if senior management retires and demand returns to historical levels. The buyer pool will be tight, but if you are looking to sell a small retailer, all it takes is one!” See Stump’s perspective in the sidebar on page 15.
Now that we have discussed how to fold them,we will discuss whether you should or not. There is a lot of noise around inflation and the impact on the economy into the future. We need to remember that the furniture industry is one of the contributors to this inflation along with gasoline and food. However, a more detailed analysis is found in the Statistically Speaking article in this issue, It Took Rising Inflation to Finally See Price Growth that allows us to state – we deserve it. The article can be found on page 42.
For the furniture industry, the quantity/ price gap widened dramatically year after year coming out of the Great Recession where falling prices forced furniture retailers to sell higher quantities. The PCE price index, compiled by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, measures the relative or percentage change in the price level of a range of goods and services (inflation or deflation). Whereas, quantity index measures the change in the physical volume of product purchased. Both indexes include imports.
In 2021, the furniture industry quantity index reached 209.5 (2012=100), meaning quantities sold grew 109.5% from 2012 to 2021, compared to only a 2.3% growth in prices (102.3 price index) for the 10-year period. Last year’s furniture industry inflation rate was 13.8% (December over December), but for the whole year averaged 8%. This void between 8% price increases for one year and 2.3% for 10 years from 2012 to 2021 shows how deep a hole the industry had dug for itself. Falling prices continued from 2012 thru 2018 with only small bumps in 2019 and 2020 before jumping in 2021.
Table B shows graphically how the widening gap between the contribution of price versus quantity sold to the growth in furniture industry sales. Unfortunately, the major question is whether the demand will continue. The fact is, after recouping the pent-up demand, the demand as measured by traffic to the store returned to normal level. The graphic presentation of a national sample of retailers with a balanced sample of retailer volumes presents the statistics in Figure 3.
If demand remained the same, what was driving the increase in revenue? Simply put, it was buyer urgency. The consumer, not hampered by looking for a better deal, just purchased. The graphic from the same national sample presents the increase in close rate (Figure 4).
However, this was not the total story. The price increases driven by raw material costs, transportation and freight, with containers moving from $3,500 per 40-footer to north of $20,000, drove the revenue. The companion graphic from the FurnitureCore national sample on average monthly sales 2019 to Jan 2022 illustrates the impact (Figure 5).
Now that you have decided to stay in the game with the chips before you, will it be small bets, adding stores in your existing market? Or bold moves expanding into adjacent markets afar, such as Furniture Mall of Kansas’ expansion into Austin, Texas with Furniture Mall of Texas and Furniture Mall of Missouri? Their expansion included a 125,000 sq. ft. development in the fourth quarter of last year. It is the time to move.
The perspective of Julius Feinblum, president of one of the leading real estate brokers in the industry, is that the retailers will expand in 2022. While their backing of deals was down going into this year, they are growing. Interestingly, Feinblum shared, “It is taking longer to get a lease signed. From what was once three months is now five-to-10 months.” However, growth will continue.
Another interesting point Feinblum shared is, “The increase in inventory at retail produces a domino effect requiring additional warehousing, which in turn increases fixed cost leading to a need for additional sales, which then drives the perception of a need for additional stores.” This is a dangerous step from our perspective in that the industry profits are driven from decreased fixed costs. (See Figure 2.)
Ben Haverty, vice president retail service group at Colliers, also offers his perspective on the current real estate market. According to Haverty, “With most furniture retailers hitting record sales and profits in 2021, owners have energy and resources to expand in 2022. However, there are new real estate realities that will temper that passion to expand. The two speedbumps slowing retail furniture expansion are availability and affordability.
Availability: What drove much of the retail furniture growth for the last three years was the abundance of available and affordable big box retail locations that came to market due to the bankruptcy of national retailers like Toy R Us and Steinmart and the downsizing of retailers like Bed Bath & Beyond. Physical retailers of all stripes took advantage of this availability and affordability to grow and expand.
However, the retail real estate market is starting to turn. The national retail vacancy rate dropped 10 basis points during the last quarter from the previous quarter and stood at 4.6% at the end of 2021. Colliers' retail research team forecasts that store openings for 2022 will surpass store closings for the first time since 2016.
Affordability: As availability goes down rents go up. Positive trends in leasing and apportion drove the average retail asking rents to $22.51 per sq. ft. Furniture retailers with expansion plans for 2022 will quickly run into the hard real estate reality of less big box availability and affordability.
Despite the issues of available and affordability outlined by Haverty, it is obvious that the major regional chains are bullish on the industry’s future with the announcements summarized in Figure 6. The industry should be careful with the potential impact of store expansion within the markets. Adding stores does not necessarily increase sales proportionately. Consider the following public data comparing Chick-fil-A and McDonald’s. McDonald’s has five-times more stores than Chick-fil-A, 20-times the advertising expenditures, and about $1 billion less in sales. That means the average Chick-fil-A location is averaging fivetimes the sales of one McDonald’s (Figure 7).
The difference is that Chick-fil-A customer’s visit four-times more frequently than McDonald’s customers. Like furniture retailers, both Chick-fil-A and McDonald’s have many competitors, but Chick-fil-A has created a highly loyal customer base. Furniture retailers do a great job of selling new customers. In fact, according to FurnitureCore, a sister company to Home Furnishings Business, the average percentage of new customers (not purchased within 10 years) was 46% last year for traditional furniture retailers with sales greater than $50 million annually. This statistic can be compared to the elapsed time by the consumer between purchases of 28 months. The challenge for a traditional furniture retailer is to execute a strategy like Chick-filA’s “Raving Fans” that would increase revenue by 30% if maintaining existing customers while still attracting new ones. While expansion is an obvious strategy, other retail sectors have overexpanded and then suffered the pains of contracting. There are other alternatives besides brick and mortar. Omnichannel will happen.
There are many reasons why a shareholder of a private company should consider an ESOP. The following lists a few of them.
1. Any Portion. The shareholder can sell any portion of the company. No third party will dictate the percentage sold. Point three below requires the ESOP to own at least 30% after closing.
2. Fair Market Value. For whatever interest the shareholder decides to sell, the shareholder will get fair market value for it. Typically, this means 15% or more in excess of what a private equity buyer will pay and within 5-10% of a strategic buyer.
3. Capital Gains Deferral. If properly structured and the shareholder timely and properly elects, the shareholder can defer his capital gains taxes, possibly permanently.
4. Control. No matter how much the shareholder sells to the ESOP even if the sale is 100% of the voting shares, the shareholder can stay in control of the company post-closing.
5. Pre-Tax Financing. The funds borrowed from the bank and/or seller are repaid by the company on a pre-tax basis (i.e., the interest and principal of the loan are both deductible). Further, if properly structured, the company can become what is essentially a for-profit, tax-exempt entity.
6. Second Bite. If the shareholder provides seller financing and/or agrees to run the company for some period following the closing of the ESOP transaction, the shareholder will be entitled to receive a significant “second bite of the apple” or transition such value to second generation family members or the company’s management team.
As one of the owners of Furniture & ApplianceMart and an Ashley HomeStore licensee, with 15 stores in Wisconsin, I believe establishing an ESOP in 2018 was one of the best decisions that my brothers made in business. Our employees own 40% of the company and my brothers and I own the remainder of the company.
Why have an ESOP? An ESOP can be the solution to several employer concerns.
• An ESOP can provide a means for business perpetuation when there is no buyer for a departing owner. Even when there are potential buyers, an ESOP results in keeping ownership local and ensures that a business stays in the communities that have supported the business.
• ESOPs offer greater flexibility for a business owner in transition from the business compared to selling to another company. You can build your own exit. For many business owners, the company is their baby/life’s work, and they want to remain in charge or involved in some capacity (such as the chairman of the board or a consultant) for a few years, or for some, the rest of their lives. You can separate the financial transaction with the company from the management succession of the company. Likewise, you can continue to be in charge if you want, or transition to your next leaders as quickly as you like.
• An ESOP can give a business a competitive advantage because of the tax benefits of an ESOP company.
• A business will be better able to withstand an economic downturn with an ESOP, compared to other businesses. ESOP companies outperform their peers during an economic downturn. Employee owners with a stake in the outcome look for opportunities to improve the company.
• Owners have the ability to diversify their investments with an ESOP. Most furniture owners have most of their net worth tied to their furniture business. Putting your eggs in one basket is not normally the best investment strategy.
• An ESOP provides customers with the opportunity to interact with an employee owner every time they interact with the business.
• ESOPs give a business a unique competitive advantage in recruiting talent. This is especially important during these challenging times to hire employees.
• Employees gain a sense of pride when they are an employee owner. Please google ESOP-Why We Go to Work-YouTube and look for the video about Greenery. You feel the passion of the employee owners at the Greenery and what an ESOP could mean to your business.
• An ESOP provides job security to your employees that have played a huge role in the success of your business.
• ESOP employee ownership provides a legacy for the business owners. This is an important feel-good benefit of an ESOP. • An ESOP provides a business with the ability to market to the community that we are an employee-owned company.
What is the opportunity for acquisition for traditional furniture retailers under $100m especially under $50m? We think furniture retail is heading into a period of consolidation. It has become harder to run a retail furniture business. And, for smaller retailers who lack large purchasing power with suppliers and logistics partners and face increasing burdens of HR compliance and IT capital investments, the challenge has become Herculean.
We think this space is ripe for private equity investment. There remains over a trillion dollars in private equity dry powder (a historic high), and furniture retail has tended to trade at fairly inexpensive multiples relative to global averages, which could entice new private equity entrants to the table looking for a deal. We think private equity players are likely to see the low hanging fruit of quickly improving top and bottom-line performance through e-commerce and consolidating and enhancing back-end logistics across locations.
The challenge will come in that the pool of prospective private equity buyers for companies delivering less than $5 million of EBITDA will be relatively small based on historic purchase patterns and our knowledge of the market. So, given that furniture retailers deliver an average EBITDA margin of less than 10%, this will create a challenge for companies under $50 million in revenue.
We see several trends emerging for investment in or acquisition of smaller traditional furniture retailers.
Trend #1: EBITDA is two-to-three-times historical performance. Owners are aging out with no exit strategy.
The generational shift as the baby boomers age will be felt dramatically in furniture retail. Many do not have succession plans in place and are exhausted from the demand boom of the last 24 months. We have seen some owners seek out a professional president to run the business, while they retain ownership, but this presents challenges. There is an approximate period of one-to-one-and-a-half years before you really know how good the hired gun is and if they damage the business then you have both a turnaround problem and an exit strategy problem. This can create a distress sale situation versus a sale from a position of strength, and there is no doubt which creates better value in a sale process.
Trend #2: ESOPs are an alternative, but have problems if senior management retires and demand returns to historical levels
We agree, recent ESOP success stories include Norwalk and Valdese Weavers. And when they work, they are great and can create compelling opportunity for employees to take greater ownership of the company. For the seller, there are attractive tax benefits. However, on the flip side there are issues that can arise with ESOPs. They carry meaningful legal and administrative costs to ensure compliance. So, if the business goes through a difficult time in terms of bottom-line performance this can be a significant drain on company resources. Timing can also be an issue, if a senior manager wants to retire and capture their returns during a period of historically high performance this can create large cash draws from the company as they return their awarded stock, and create a mismatch of employee incentives.
Trend #3: Large retailers, with some exceptions, have no appetite for acquisitions.
Large retailers such as Rooms to Go, Havertys, and with the exception of Raymour, have no appetite for acquisition with the memory of what happened to Heilig Myers. There is also the perception that they don’t want to change acquired retailers’ culture. And overall, we see trends of the strong getting stronger. We anticipate seeing some well capitalized regional and national strategic retailers jump at the opportunity to eliminate a competitor and expand their customer base. But overall, we believe the larger retailers are focused on their own brands, distribution, and vertical integration opportunities. The buyer pool will be tight, but if you are looking to sell a small retailer, all it takes is one!
Now, the pandemic has stripped away any rules left for the dining category. While some consumers gravitated to rekindling family meal time around a large table, others chose to blend intimacy with functionality – creating space with smaller, cozier tables paired with arm chairs, desks or sofas. When it comes to the dining area, consumers want options. Manufacturers and retailers are called to the challenge by supplying a variety of products to fit an array of needs.
When consumers were polled during a FurnitureCore survey (FurnitureCore is a sister company of Home Furnishings Business) and asked the area they most recently purchased dining room furniture for, 71.32% said a casual dining area and 28.68% said a formal dining room. The desire to incorporate a versatile dining space has led to a rise in contemporary and modern dining room furniture. During the same consumer research, FurnitureCore asked consumers what style of furniture they had in their casual dining room area. 40.74% answered contemporary, followed by 29.49% with traditional, 11.8% with country/ rustic and 6.7% with country/European. The categories of mission/shaker, cottage, and transitional each accounted for 3.75% of consumer response.
Always popular are dining tables that can serve both small family dinners and large gatherings. Stickley has found success with its bestselling Walnut Grove Table that expands from 74” to 110”. “Customers old and new have flocked to the Walnut Grove Collection and are making new family memories around the rectangular dining table and chairs. The blend of mid-century modern and Scandinavian design is fresh and appealing,” said Matt Target, director of marketing for Stickley. Greenington’s bestselling collection with an expandable table also bridges contemporary design with functionality. According to Vice President of Sales Troy Lerew, “the Erikka Collection provides a modern design with timeless appeal. Our dealers will tell you that it provides the perfect solution for any size dining room.”
The dining room has become a hybrid space used for what people need at different times in their lives and for many that is still the formal dining room. Tradition, paired with European design, is driving the success of Hooker Furniture’s current bestseller. Mike Harris, president of Hooker Upholstery and Case Goods says, “Commanding attention in any space, the Castella Table is a European-inspired, traditional piece that pairs seamlessly with wood and upholstered dining chairs alike. Its size and scale are perfect for entertaining, and its soft, rustic finish works well with several variations of décor.”
Whether the style is traditional, modern or country and being used for office space, homework, a dinner party of eight or a small family dinner, consumers are now putting dining room furniture in all different living areas of the house. Consumers were asked by FurnitureCore to choose from a list of activities that their family does in the dining room/kitchen in addition to eating. Sit at table/talk received 77.44%, followed by watch TV at 45.51%, pay bills at 42.83%, do hobbies at 36.52%, do school work at 28.30%, and do work brought from the office at 27.72%.
In line with other furniture categories, dining room furniture sales have skyrocketed over the last year. Based on the FurnitureCore Industry Model, developed by Impact Consulting Services, parent company to Home Furnishings Business, research shows that the dining room category has increased steadily since 2019, finishing 2021 with $14.96 billion in sales, up from $12.62 billion in 2020 and $11.44 billion in 2019. While sales dipped 2.4% from $3.73 billion in Q1 of 2021 to $3.64 billion in Q2, sales rebounded by 7.1% from $3.66 billion in Q3 to $3.92 billion in the final quarter of last year. Whatever you call the space you put your fabulous new table and/or chairs in, the dining category is not going anywhere.
The U.S. Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) price index for all consumer spending in total goods and services rose in 2021 at the fastest pace since 1981, 5.8%. The better-known consumer price index (CPI) jumped by an even higher 7%, roughly 5% higher than the Federal Reserve considers a healthy annual inflation close to 2%. The Fed views the PCE index—the core rate in particular—as the most accurate measure of U.S. inflation. It is more comprehensive and takes into account when consumers substitute cheaper goods for more expensive ones, among other things. (See Figure 1: Definitions).
As shown in Table A, up until 2021, furniture and bedding products were worth less than in 2012, and growth came through selling more product at a cheaper price with imported goods adding the pressure.
Consumer spending on furniture and bedding products increased 21.9% in 2021 over the previous pandemic year (Table B). In terms of chained dollars (2012 base year), the industry grew 13% - inflation pushing current dollar growth 8% higher. (See Figure 1. Definitions). In 2015 through 2017, current dollar growth could not keep up with chained dollar growth. The deflation really began to make a mark in 2016 with furniture industry current dollar growth of 6.7% compared to 9.2% for chained growth, forcing companies to sell almost 50% more to make up for the falling prices.
While annual 2021 produced major growth in consumer spending for furniture and bedding, sales dipped down by the end of the year. In January of last year, furniture industry sales jumped 17.4% over the preceding December 2020. March, August and October also showed monthly growth – 8.4%, 4.2% and 3.3%, respectively. However, consumer spending slowed in November, down 1.3% over October and fell significantly in December, down 7% compared to November (Table C). As shown in Table D, furniture is the fastest growing home furnishings product with consumer purchases well over $100 billion compared to all other products in the same category.
Among electronics, consumer spending on computer software and accessories steadily increased an average of 12.6% from 2016 before pandemic demand and inflation pushed spending higher to 18.2% in 2021 to $135 billion (Table E). The pandemic also pushed increases in consumer spending on slower-to-grow categories – major household appliances, televisions and personal computers/tablets – above 18% from 2020 to 2021.
Figure 2 summarizes the growth in consumer spending among selected major furniture and home furnishings categories over the last three years add a column to reflect inflation in 2021 (December 2021 over December 2020). Furniture, along with carpets and other floor coverings, were the best performing of the home furnishings categories, both increasing 21.9% in 2021. However, all other categories also experienced double-digit growth above 15%. Furniture products were also hit the hardest with inflation at 13.8% in 2021, partially explaining the high growth. No other home furnishings broad category was close to that number in terms of inflation. (Note: Year-end Inflation is usually calculated as December over prior year December, in this case December 2021 over December 2020, 13.8% for the furniture industry. However, furniture industry average annual monthly inflation in 2021 was 8%.)
How did furniture growth and inflation compare to other consumer products? Figure 3 shows that durable goods, including furniture, were the economic workhorses of the pandemic. Consumer spending on services had led economic growth since 2015, outpacing spending growth on both durable goods and nondurables. However, during the pandemic shutdown in 2020, consumer spending on services dropped 6.7% and grew the slowest of the three main sectors of the economy – durable goods, nondurables (including food and energy) and household consumption of services (Figure 3). The drop in 2020 in services spending was not entirely the consumer’s choice as restaurants, theaters, sports arenas, and travel closed for a significant period. However, many consumers have been slow to return those services. Inflation for gasoline and other energy goods was highest at 47.9% as well as 22.8% for motor vehicles.
Quantity Index vs. Price Index The falling prices and deflation experienced by the furniture industry coming out of the Great Recession only started to recover last year as inflation began to impact furniture and most other consumer products. Without growing price support, the quantities needed to maintain annual growth have skyrocketed.
Figure 4 depicts how since 2021, the quantity index of furniture items sold grew at twice the rate (2.0) compared to price growth. Reading the table for furniture, a quantity index of 209.5 means that quantities of furniture purchases have increased 109.7% between 2012 to 2021 (2012 index=100). Conversely, prices are only 2.3% above 2012 levels, and this just happened in the last year 2021. But furniture has fared better than all other home furnishings broad categories. The television industry is an example of one of the hardest hit electronics categories experiencing exploding price deflation falling 73.3% 2012 to 2021. The rate of growth in quantities sold versus price increases for selected home furnishings and electronics is shown in Figure 4. Product sales growth is a combination of the increase (or decrease) in prices plus the increase (or decrease) in quantities sold. (Note: Year-end inflation is generally reported December over previous year December. Comparing quantity and price indexes requires averaging monthly indexes to reflect the impact for the whole year.)
Deflation (falling prices) continued for the furniture industry coming out of the Great Recession until 2018 when inflation picked up 0.1%, finally closely matching the quantity index to current dollars (Table F). The price index hovered above 2% from 2018 to 2019 and was 0.1% from 2019 to 2020 before exploding during the pandemic. In 2021, the quantity index (13%) paired with inflation/price index (8%) pushed current consumer spending on furniture to a 21.9% growth.
Pricing remained relatively steady for carpets and other floor coverings after 2013 (Table G). Current dollars kept up to the quantity index with very little change in the price index. The pandemic pushed the price index up 2.6% from 2020 to 2021, increasing current dollars by 21.9% with a quantity index of 18.9%.
After a negative price index through 2018, consumer spending on major appliances began to improve. Current dollars rose by 9.9% from 2019 to 2020 and another 18.8% following the start of the pandemic. The price index reached 10.8% from 2020 to 2021 (Table H).
By far the hardest hit from falling prices before the pandemic is the television category (Table I). The price index dropped to as low as -19.6% in 2016 and the quantity index reached as high as 31.2% in 2019 with current dollar growth at only 5.8%. Inflation has helped the pricing gap for televisions. From 2020 to 2021, quantity index was 12.4% and 5.8% from the price index pushed consumer spending to 18.8%.
Compared to other home furnishings products, inflation has given the furniture category a big jump in pricing last year. The category of clocks, lamps, lighting fixtures, and other household items suffered from a negative price index (deflation) up until last year. In 2021, consumer spending grew 21.4% alongside a quantity index of 18.1% and just 2.8% on the price index (Table J).
The obvious result was significant pressure on the retailers to expand their floor assortment to accommodate the demand. With these major line extensions came a deterioration of the manufacturerretailer partnership. The rationale – our product line is broad enough to sell multiple retailers in the same market without duplicating product. Thus marked the beginning of the disintegration of the manufacturer’s brand from a consumer’s perspective. You see it everywhere, no exclusivity.
What Did Retailers Do?
Retailers responded in the ensuing decades with expanded store size facilitated by the bankruptcy of many of the big box chains. The result was increased sales but not in direct proportion to the increased square footage. Currently sales per square foot is $240 annually. Interestingly larger retailers ($100M+) and smaller retailers (<$5m) achieved an advantage of 50%.
The productivity has declined as store size increased and furniture retailing abandoned its “store as a designation” to pursue multiple stores in the same market. Decades ago, furniture stores’ selling productivity (inflation-adjusted) exceeded today’s performance metrics – Less Is More?
Even the freshman majoring in business has been exposed to the concept of 80/20. In other words, 20% of the product line would represent 80% of the product sold. This is not true for furniture retailing where the top 20%’s product line represents less than 50% to 60% of sales.
This concept raises the question – can we do with fewer products and produce the same volume of sales? During the supply chain disruption brought on by the pandemic, retailer merchandise assortment declined. The graphic below presents the comparisons.
Interestingly the impact on upholstery (stationary/fabric) was felt immediately while casegood assortments were maintained. There is an obvious relationship between domestic and offshore production and the delivery cycle. The decision to remove and replace the slot was delayed with anticipated delivery.
The rotation out of the top slot did shift significantly from quarter to quarter as may be seen by comparing the current quarterly ranking of SKUs to pre-pandemic rankings. Note the movement in ranking by SKU from quarter to quarter in a typical traditional retailer with over $10M in sales.
What did change significantly was average unit selling price. As may be seen from the graphic, upholstery was stable ($654/unit) from 2019 Q3 to 2020 Q3 but exploded by 24% a year later (2021 Q3) to $810 per unit. Casegoods performed similarly but dining (tables) moved slower from $391 per unit to $426 per unit, an increase of 9%. This deviation by price points is more obvious when we compare a price distribution curve for stationary upholstery (fabric) for sofas/loveseats in 2019 and 2021 Q3 YTD.
It should be noted that the percent of units sold in 2021 Q3 in the below $499 price range decreased from 38.5% to 21.1% in 2021 Q3. In terms of dollars, the percent declined from 22.5% in 2020 Q3 to 11.1% in 2021 Q3.
What Did Manufacturers Do?
Contrary to retailers’ opinion that manufacturers just increased prices and sent delayed delivery notices, manufacturers scrambled to satisfy demand. As was discussed earlier, manufacturers – unbridled with capacity restraints – pursued all retailers that could be sold. Armed with the justification that their lines were broad enough that multiple retailers could include their merchandise assortment without cannibalization, manufacturers continued to sell to as many retailers as possible in a market. This foundation strategy assumption overlooks that there are limited sales and purchasers in each market (MSA). The fact is, many manufacturers cannot determine their sales in each of the 404 specific markets (MSAs) in which 95% of all furniture is sold. The table below illustrates the required business intelligence (ILLUSTRATION ONLY).
It should be noted that this lack of sales in smaller markets is an opportunity to sell to retailers in those markets or directly to consumer via e-commerce. Most manufacturers, lacking this more in-depth knowledge of where they sell, resorted to using an axe instead of a scalpel in adjusting their retail distribution. Manufacturers were forced to reduce their retail base in order to improve their delivery. It is difficult to measure the impact of the 20+ year relationship that was destroyed. Now that the painful cuts have been made, the old familiar term of PARTNERSHIP has emerged. Maybe it will be more than a one-night stand and evolve into an enduring profitable relationship. Again, can SELLING FEWER (RETAILERS) BE MORE?
In addition to curtailing their retailer base, the focus became merchandise line reduction in order to improve the delivery time. In the past decade, the focus was “endless aisles”. The emerging term is a “curated assortment”. The impact of the broken supply chain has been a reduction in the product line-up. As may be seen from the graphic below, the post-pandemic consumer has shifted from design to a combination of value and quality – a challenging blend. The table below presents a percentage of consumers ranking each element in preference order. With the reduction in their retailer base and a curtailing of their merchandising assortment, manufacturers will be able to improve service levels to the normal four-to-six-week cycle. While the adjustments have been painful on both the manufacturing and retail sectors, the demand continues as illustrated below.
Though this graphic is reassuring, we need to understand that this is revenue demand – NOT unit demand. In other words, sales have increased based upon the average unit price and increased close rate – NOT increased traffic into the store. Thus the challenge is still there to create product that attracts consumers to the store or to the website to buy.