Perplexidades

Estratégia é saber claramente o que não fazer!

Estratégia é ser coerente!

Por isso, fico a pensar na consistência desta Starbucks, "Está tudo relacionado", de Setembro de 2017, com esta de hoje, "Starbucks, Trailing Dunkin', Tim's And McDonald's, Wants To Speed Up Its Drive-Thru"

Para reflexão

Comparar este texto "Starbucks baristas get big raises: 5% or more"(Julho de 2016) e mais este outro "Pay raises at J.P. Morgan, Starbucks don’t justify a higher minimum wage" (Julho de 2016) com "Starbucks Baristas Are Mad As Hell (at Starbucks) and They're Not Going To Take It Anymore".

E outros sectores, por cá, não podem fazer o mesmo?

Ideia interessante "Starbucks red cups runneth over with holiday cheer (and wide profit margins)":

"He says department stores can promote huge holiday inventories, but coffee shops just have coffee. “What they need to do is come up with special items to break the habit consumers have of getting the same thing in the same way every single day.”
.
Even if it’s just putting plain coffee in a pretty red cup."

Por exemplo, por que é que uma padaria não pode fazer o mesmo? Por que é que não se podem criar produtos sazonais, como o bolo-rei, apostando na escassez, numa tradição, num ciclo natural, para obter margens mais interessantes?
.
E outros sectores, não podem fazer o mesmo?

Commodity ou Experiência? (parte II)

Há dias, ao ler que os estabelecimentos onde se vende café andam a baixar preços para seduzirem os clientes a regressar ao consumo, escrevi a parte I.
.
As curvas de Dolan e Simon são eloquentes para demonstrar o que acontece ao lucro de quem baixa os seus preços... e o que acontece a quem os aumenta, vantagens de quem conhece o Evangelho do Valor.
.
Por isso, com a pergunta em mente: "commodity ou experiência?", reflectir sobre o que fez a Starbucks em 2009 com a quebra no consumo, em "Starbucks Price Increase – A Case Study In Analysis":

"Starbucks decided to raise its drink prices by as much as 8% (5 cents to 30 cents), They are doing this just when customers are cutting back on their Starbucks trips and switching to cheaper alternatives from McDonalds and Dunkin Donuts.

The conventional “wisdom” on pricing is, when recession pushes customers to cut back on expenses and switch from your products to cheaper alternatives, you cut your prices to keep the customers. While this is a usually accepted and followed practice, it is neither wisdom nor based on analysis. 

...

"when price conscious customers moved out all they are left with are price insensitive customers who prefer their products. Hence it makes sense to charge more for them as long as the loss in profit from further drop in customers is less than the increase in profit from higher price."

Uma grande lição aqui "Pricing Direction For Recessionary Times – Higher" (Vale mesmo a pena ler para reflectir e, quiçá, influenciar decisões futuras. E, nestes tempos em que tantos e tantos portugueses compram private-label... muitas empresas deviam reflectir sobre isto)

E quais os resultados para a Starbucks, passados estes anos:

 BTW:

"As you read this multiple times you will find all kinds of reasons except, “We cater to a somewhat higher-income customer and we price our products based on customer willingness to pay. Besides we don’t expect any push back from these high income segment”.

A key attribute of those practicing value based pricing is never explicitly saying that they are practicing value based pricing. There are always other reasons and you never say pricing at customer willingness to pay. A key part of practicing effective pricing is effective pricing communication and managing customer perception. Failing that you will face backlash as some brands recently did."

Crescimento, indicadores e arrogância

Aranha, este artigo "Starbucks’ quest for healthy growth: An interview with Howard Schultz" ajuda a explicar o sucedido em Itália com a Starbucks.
.
Primeiro, uma saudável rejeição do crescimento como uma religião.
.
"growth became a carcinogen at Starbucks
...
When you look at growth as a strategy, it becomes somewhat seductive, addictive. But growth should not be—and is not — a strategy; it’s a tactic. (Moi ici: Nunca esquecer "Volume is vanity, Profit is sanity") The primary lesson I’ve learned over the years is that growth and success can cover up a lot of mistakes."
.
Também interessante, o exemplo de como o que se mede influencia o comportamento dos gestores:
.
"there’s a fine line between trying to manage the company in the most appropriate fiduciary way—and at the same time providing analysts with 100 percent transparency, which they deserve.
...
An albatross around the neck of most retailers and restaurant companies is this metric that Wall Street created many, many years ago: the calculation of the growth of stores open for more than one year.
...
we had become linked internally to the comp-store sales number, and we started making decisions that were driving incremental revenue and perhaps were not consistent with the equity of the brand. I wanted to remove that albatross from the necks of the operators.
So I announced, one day when I came back, that we were going to stop reporting monthly comps."
.
Cá está uma justificação para a dúvida do Aranha:
.
"What we want to do as a company is put our feet in the shoes of our customers. What does that mean, especially in China? It means that not everything from Starbucks in China should be invented in Starbucks in Seattle. Now, the Chinese customer, like many customers around the world, does not want a watered-down Starbucks. But we want to be highly respectful of the cultural differences in every market, especially China, and appeal to the Chinese customer. So as an example, the food for the Chinese stores is predominantly designed for the Chinese palate.
Now, this is not a company that did these kinds of things in the past. We were fighting a war here between the people in Seattle who want a blueberry muffin and the people in China who say, “You know what, I think black sesame is probably an ingredient that they would rather have than blueberry.” And I would say that goes back to the hubris of the past, when we thought, we’re going to change behavior."