Those days are remembered as fondly as we remember $1.30 per gallon gas, new episodes of Seinfeld, and the raging conflict between Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich.
Back in the 1990s, we'd evaluate each item based on the sales generated in that specific catalog, divided by the space allocated to the item.
Here's a simple example. Assume we circulate a catalog to 1,000,000 individuals. On one page of the catalog, there are three items featured.
- Item #1 = 0.15 page, $1,200 sales.
- Item $2 = 0.35 page, $2,200 sales.
- Item $3 = 0.50 page, $3,200 sales.
Let's control for the amount of space the item was given.
- Item #1 = $1,200 sales / (0.15 page * 1,000,000 circ / 1,000 pages) = $80.00 DMPC.
- Item #2 = $2,200 sales / (0.35 page * 1,000,000 circ / 1,000 pages) = $62.86 DMPC.
- Item #3 = $3,200 sales / (0.50 page * 1,000,000 circ / 1,000 pages) = $64.00 DMPC.
After controlling for the number of pages circulated, Item #1 actually performed the best!
In the 1990s, we'd evaluate every item in the catalog in this manner, giving more space to the items that performed best, limiting space to the items that performed worst.
Now fast forward to 2008. You still mail the catalog to 1,000,000 souls who haven't told a third party opt-out service that they are disgruntled with your activities. What has changed since 1990?
- Sixty percent of your transactions occur online, about half of those transactions are driven by catalog marketing.
- You also deliver eight e-mail campaigns during the time when the catalog is active, six of the eight e-mail campaigns offer free shipping, a perk not given to loyal catalog shoppers.
- Ten percent of your marketing budget is allocated to paid search, spread across 2,500 keywords.
- Affiliate marketing and shopping comparison sites contribute to your online sales.
- Portal advertising drives traffic to your site.
- Items featured on blogs account for 2% of your sales.
- Your online merchandise assortment is greater than your catalog merchandise assortment.
- You've learned that catalog marketing and e-mail marketing drive sales to items not featured in either marketing activity.
Increasingly, I see multichannel wizards attempting to perform Monthly Item Profitability Reports. In other words, every item a multichannel brand sells is evaluated on the basis of the monthly profit generated across all advertising activities. Here's a sample Monthly Item Profitability Report.
|MONTHLY ITEM PROFITABILITY REPORT|
|Average Price Per Item Sold||$39.99|
|Telephone Demand, Total||$8,000|
|Online Demand, Total||$12,000|
|Less Catalog Marketing||$1,850|
|Less E-Mail Marketing||$50|
|Less Paid Search Marketing||$400|
|Less Affiliate Marketing||$275|
|Less Shopping Comp. Mktg||$225|
|Less Portal Advertising Exp.||$315|
|Total Advertising Expense||$3,115|
|Variable Operating Profit||$3,427|
|Profit, % of Net Sales||22.8%|
|Ad to Sales Ratio||20.7%|
Notice that all demand generated by an item is included in the report. Similarly, advertising expense by advertising channel is allocated to each item.
This isn't an easy thing to do, and quite honestly, few multichannel companies have the database infrastructure to conduct item-level profit and loss statements on a fluid and automated basis. Regardless, this is the direction our industry is taking, and it is a necessary step if we want to truly offer a profitable multichannel merchandise assortment.
Your thoughts? Who is doing this well? Have you made different decisions as a result of conducting an analysis of this nature?