The Hated Holiday

There's just nothing in ecommerce more rudimentary, nothing that shows your service provider doesn't truly understand business ... than the promotion of Cyber Monday.

Or worse, "BFCM" as the service provider industry calls it.

Yesterday I talked about "double dipping" ... the proven method of acquiring / converting customers in September / October so they are recent and active in November / December, thereby "double dipping" ... generating two orders in a short period of time.

What makes more sense to you?

• Acquire a customer or activate a customer in Sep/Oct and then get another quick purchase in Nov/Dec?
• Generate an order at 50% off and then the customer doesn't spend money on full priced merchandise the rest of the year while waiting for "BFCM" again? It's good business for service providers. It's not good business for you. Why give away all that gross margin to participate in a service provider holiday?

Have you ever asked yourself why Amazon might benefit from Prime Days in the first week of October? It's almost like they're trying to get customers to double-dip!

Double-Dip Season

As you likely know, in most cases you WANT to acquire a new customer in September or October.

Why?

You get to double-dip. 

When you acquire a customer on December 13, the customer is "done". The customer might purchase clearance products in January and might buy again in Spring (but probably won't buy again in Spring). From there, the customer largely goes dormant until the following November/December.

When you acquire a customer on October 13, the customer is "not done". When the customer is most likely to buy for a second time (the first ten weeks after a first purchase), you present the customer with November / December ... two months of amplified response. The customer quickly becomes a 2x buyer, and from there the customer is on the path to loyalty.

One of the easiest ways to build a loyal customer base is to acquire customers in Sep/Oct then send trigger-based email campaigns to customers through December to rapidly generate a second order. Many companies do this, it's highly effective, and it's highly profitable.

So go do it!!

Working With A Great Partner

When I worked at Eddie Bauer, I was part of what was called the "Catalog Business Team" ... CBT. It was our job to execute the catalog and ecommerce marketing, merchandising, inventory, creative, and operational team plans. Not being Lemonheads, we took our mandate further. We acted like we owned the catalog/ecommerce division, for good reason of course, because if we messed up, we were fired. Best to be fired setting the tone rather than following marching orders.

I was responsible for catalog marketing and analytics. My inventory partner was the best. We made the company a ton of money by working together, partnering on what our business / sales plan would be long before anybody else paid attention. By doing that, we had a solid plan when the Executives chose to pay attention. They nibbled around the edges of the plan, but the plan was truly our plan.

The most profit the catalog/ecommerce channel ever generated happened on our watch.

We partnered on dictating the merchandise assortment we'd feature in catalog and online. Back then the catalog drove everything, today it would be quite a different story. Let's pretend that last year's October catalog had the following composition.

• 24 pages of mens existing merch.
• 24 pages of mens new merch.
• 36 pages of womens existing merch.
• 36 pages of womens new merch.
• 8 pages of home.
• 8 pages of womens tailored merch.
• 136 pages total.

I would determine how many pages we could profitably mail next year, based on last year's productivity. Let's say I could only author 120 pages. My partner would go back and optimize performance of each category above based on last year's productivity, yielding a plan that might look like this.

• 16 pages of mens existing merch.
• 20 pages of mens new merch.
• 40 pages of womens existing merch.
• 36 pages of womens new merch.
• 4 pages of home.
• 4 pages of womens tailored merch.
• 120 pages total.

From here, I'd calculate the expected productivity of the pages. Fewer pages means less sales but better productivity. I'd calculate "merchandise productivity" ... showing that my partner's optimization resulted in each page being 10% more productive. Sales would decrease, but each page was more profitable. This allowed me to circulate deeper, converting more customers.

• Last Year:  3,000,000 catalogs at 136 pages, sales = $20,000,000. Demand per Thousand Pages Circulated = $49.02.
• Next Year:  3,500,000 catalogs at 120 pages, sales = $22,320,000. Demand per Thousand Pages Circulated = $53.14.
• Demand/Sales would be +12%, ad costs would be +3%, profit would increase by $700,000.

We replicated this for every catalog we'd mail, we'd adjust merchandise productivity and give direction to the nascent ecommerce team, our plan would fold into plans for the call center, the distribution center, for inventory buys, and it would give direction to our merchants and creative team.

There were two teams that generally argued with the plan.

1. The merchandising team.
2. The creative team.

The merchandising team did not like constraints ... constraints like "16 pages of mens existing merchandise". They wanted 32 pages. My partner and I would run the scenarios for everybody, showing how much sales/profit we'd give up adhering to their direction. To some extent this happens at every company, but disciplined companies push back when the merchants want "more".

The creative team did not like constraints. They wanted eight pages for "branding". No selling. We'd explain that was like flushing $80,000 of profit down the toilet. We'd ask the creative folks if they wanted to explain their ideas to the CEO. They didn't want to explain their ideas to the CEO.

There's nothing that destroys the profitability of an old-school catalog division like a creative director who wants to explore "branding".

But when you have a great business partner ... and the two of you work in lock-step ... you can achieve record profit.

Within a year I'd leave to work in the dot-com world (what ultimately became the 'retargeting' industry), watched my stock options go from 78 13/16 to 1, then accepted a job at Nordstrom, where I again had great partners (the merchant/creative person and the inventory person were both very good).

There are few things in business more enjoyable than working with great partners who have facts and work in lock-step with you to achieve great things ... and then great things happen.

Life of an Item

In case you are wondering why I'm talking about items / merchandise more often, this is a process that happens every 3-5 years. Business doesn't go the way we want it to, we focus on merchandise for awhile (which often fixes the problem), then we get away from merch and focus on marketing channels until marketing channels don't work great (usually caused by merchandise problems) ... and we repeat the cycle.

We're always repeating the cycle.

Sometimes our merchandise assortment gets stale. It happens to every company. It's during the "stale periods" when we dig a bit deeper.

Let's pretend you measure how much items sell by year ... let's pretend you've analyzed the dynamic for items you've offered for at least four years. You see the following.

• Intro Stub Year = $50,000 per item.
• First Full Year = $75,000.
• Second Full Year = $38,000.
• Third Full Year = $19,000.
• Fourth Full Year = $9,500.

The item essentially generates $191,000 over the stub year and first four years. You don't have unlimited warehousing space, so when an item dips below, say, $15,000, you discontinue the item and find something new. This means the life of the item is the stub year plus three full years.

Once you have a framework, you can identify the items in your assortment that are at the end of their life. You can communicate with your merchants that your customers need newness.

This is the point in the discussion where somebody will raise their hand and offer me advice:

• "I work in marketing, and I shouldn't have to deal with merchandise performance, that's why we have merchants. I should be allowed to focus on marketing."

Oh my little grasshopper.

Have you ever noticed that when business is off by 5% the Finance Team and the Merchant Team start asking questions about marketing? I notice it. It happens. All the time. It's happened for the thirty-six years I've been in this business. Marketers are constantly being fired for merchandising sins.

Checks and balances are important. You do not want to be held accountable because your merchandising partners held on to old products too long. Measure the life of an item, and focus on communication when you notice that products are aging, potentially harming customer response.

Assortment Age

If you want to understand if your customers are being impacted by your merchandise assortment, you can run my comp segment metrics (obviously) - you can run my Class Of Reporting (duh).

You can also measure what I call "Assortment Age".

Take every item a customer purchased in September, and for those items calculate the number of months that item has been available to be sold. If it were introduced fifteen months ago, the age of that item is 15 months. Perform this for every item you sell.

Compare September 2026 to September 2025, to September 2024. What is the average age of the assortment the customer purchased?

You might see something like this:

• 2026 = 13.2 Months.
• 2025 = 18.1 Month.
• 2024 = 13.6 Months.

The 2025 metric should set off all sorts of alarm bells.

There are a thousand reasons why an assortment ages or is immature. It's nearly impossible to balance the metric perfectly, teeter-totter style. Sometimes your assortment needs to be rebuilt and the assortment will be artificially "young".

If you have a month where results aren't ideal, go look at your merchandise assortment, calculate Assortment Age, and see what it tells you.

Email Messaging to Non-Fans

One of the challenges of ecommerce-in-a-box is that you work so hard to piece together a credible vendor solution (i.e. Shopify) that you don't stop to ask yourself how the customer sees the experience.

Example?

Friday Pickleball.

I was on the ground floor, watching their funny videos years ago.

I've spoken with the guys at a pickleball tournament. If you've never been to a PPA Tournament in Mesa (or elsewhere), by all means, open up your wallet and enjoy. You might see the guys there.

My wife paid $ to be coached by Kyle Koszuta. I've forwarded his videos to my audience at Pickleball Mathlete. We've watched him battle the pros in early rounds on Pickleball.TV. We've enjoyed watching Rachel Rohrabacher battle the best in the business, using their paddles as their first signed pro.

We took their Pickleball Personality Test.

We watched those guys as they changed their lives, moving to Phoenix to grow their careers.

Last week, I needed a new paddle ... I bought the Friday Aura to help protect my arm from tennis elbow.

You'd likely say I'm a "fan".

Their ecommerce-in-a-box solution doesn't know that. They've sent me two ecommerce-related messages since.

1. Please Become An Affiliate Marketer For Them.
2. The Message Below.

I just bought a paddle, and NOW you're going to tell me you'll help me find the right paddle?

Mind you, this doesn't change anything because I'm a fan. I'm with them.

The message is for you, it's illustrative for your business. The vast majority of your customers are not fans. Nope. Those who aren't fans don't want a "customer relationship". They want you to fulfill a want/need they have at a point-in-time. Telling them you can solve a problem hours after they purchase thinking they've already solved the problem is counter-productive. It's especially counter-productive because you are a small/scrappy brand using Shopify / Klaviyo so you can compete/beat somebody like Macy's ... only to have ecommerce-in-a-box fail you.

Again, I love what the Friday Pickleball folks are doing overall - I'm a fan, so I'm not going anywhere. Most of your customers are not fans, so the rules for those customers are different. Your messaging should reflect that fact, it needs to be more "on point" if you will.

Rocktober

Growing up, we had a Classic Rock station (it wasn't really "classic" yet, but you get the drift) that adored the month of October. They called October "Rocktober". Combine that with "Two for Tuesday" and you really had something ... the dulcet tones of the band Rainbow singing "Stone Cold" and "All Night Long".

I thought about stopping the post right there, but that wouldn't be fair to you, the loyal reader.

Every one of you has a marketing channel that is dying. Sort of like FM Radio is dying. My favorite station in the Pacific Northwest was KRXY ("Roxy") 94.5 from Shelton. You'd hear Rainbow's "Stone Cold" followed by "Cherish" by Madonna followed by "Loser" by Beck and then they'd wrap it up with something from Arianna Grande. Just random Rock/Pop nonsense.

There was nothing like it.

And then?

Spotify playlists.

On June 30, KRXY didn't sell to some soulless entity and become part of the "iHeart Radio Family". They just shut down. Over. Fin. Bankrupt. Their scraps were ultimately acquired by another local station.

Every one of you has a marketing channel that is dying. For some of you, you don't have the metrics to realize that the marketing channel is dying. You keep paying Facebook and they keep sending you customers eight years older than your average customer and you think things are fine. They're not fine. One of the signs of a dying marketing channel is that the customers delivered by the marketing channel are disproportionately older than the age of customers from other marketing channels. Catalogers know this all too well ... they ran their businesses into the ground trusting co-op marketing channels who delivered 74 year old customers instead of the 47 year old customers they needed.

Identify the average age of all customers acquired in the past year by marketing channel. Yeah yeah, I know, marketing attribution double-counting blah blah blah. Do the work anyway. If the nascent new customer from ChatGPT is 33 years old, the Google Search customer is 43 years old, and the paid social customer from Facebook is 58 years old, you have a pretty good idea which marketing channel is going to become KRXY.

Warning Sign: Prices Up, Customers Correspondingly Down

When you increase prices (typically by discontinuing a product line and introducing a new/comparable line at a higher price), there are several things that can happen.

1. Nothing. This is the hope. You essentially increase prices and customers don't care. It's the kind of thing Apple gets away with.
2. Fewer Items per Order. This is the most common outcome. Prices increase from $20 to $25, customers in-kind decrease items per order from 2.5 to 2.0. Nothing has been accomplished with the notable exception of fewer items going through your distribution center. 
3. Fewer Orders per Buyer:  Happens less frequently than (2) above but it still happens. Some of your existing customers just say "no". AOV hawks will quickly point out that there's nothing wrong with AOV, and they're right, AOV often increases in these circumstances. And yet? Business is just "off" a few percentage points ... because customers are not buying as often.
4. Lower Repurchase Rate:  Sort of a byproduct of Fewer Orders per Buyer, but more significant because some customers just say "no mas" and go find something cheaper on Amazon. Once you start trading in the dark arts of lower repurchase rates, all sorts of lousy outcomes transpire. Your buyer file decreases, you have to "make budget" so you acquire more new customers at ever-more-expensive rates to make up the difference harming the p&l in the process. This is a common scenario.
5. Fewer New/Reactivated Buyers: The counterpart to (4) above. (4) is a measure of what your existing customers think, (5) is a measure of what "the market" thinks about your pricing. It is common to see a disconnect here ... stable repurchase rates among existing buyers but a 20% drop in new/reactivated buyers. If your annual rebuy rate is 30%, the market dictates what you do. If your annual rebuy rate is 70%, you dictate what you do.

(4) and (5) result in declining customer counts. Review your prices post-COVID and correlate average price per item purchased with rebuy rates and with new/reactivated buyers.

Does the analysis reflect any warning signs?

Signaling The Warning Signs

Here's lawyer-esque boilerplate commentary from Gap's 10K report for 2025, page 38.

A credit rating of BB+ isn't great.

For you and I, interest rates are going up.

And if you really want to terrify yourself, listen to this podcast (click here) and learn what happens when the AI bubble pops. Assuming the hosts are correct, which is an assumption.

You can slide on down to page 45 in the 10K document. Sales up two percent. Store sales +1%, Ecommerce sales +4%. A +2 comp in an inflationary environment isn't really a +2 comp, as you all know. Gross margin was down from 41.3% to 40.8%. Inventory was +7% (oh oh).

If this phrase for fixing the business doesn't signal a warning sign, I don't know what does. Again, from page 45.

• "... optimizing our platform to drive scale by advancing capabilities that amplify and enable our brands."

3% of stores have been closed over the past two years.

Free cash flow is down nearly 20% vs. a year prior.

Now, you're probably saying to yourself, "Kevin, that's the 2025 annual report. They're halfway or more into 2026". You are correct.

Q2 2026:

Net Sales -2%.

Gross Profit +$390 million due to a recovery of $417 million in tariffs, otherwise down $27 million.

You're probably paying attention to your metrics as well. Get your business as healthy as you can. It's possible you'll experience chaos after the election, followed by the unwinding of the AI bubble over the next two years. Or not. I'd want to be prepared.

Reassessing

There's been all sorts of calamities, some caused by external issues, some self-inflicted.

I recall 1995, 1998, years where the companies I was with caused their own problems.

2001 - a hybrid of the end of the dotcom era and self-inflicted damage.

2007 - when you could feel that customers spent all their "free" money from their homes, there wasn't anything left to spend (as we'd soon find out).

2012 - the collapse of the omnichannel movement begins (accelerating into 2016/2017).

2021 (Fall) - the popping of the COVID bump.

The data I'm seeing these days is mixed, with some able to thrive, others battling external issues and internal mistakes.

When business signals are mixed, reassess your marketing spend, reassess your new item development plan. Run your Class Of Report (I'll do it for you if you don't have the resources to do it), and make sure you aren't -20% on demand from new items this year (which will cost you money on existing items next year) or -20% on existing items this year (meaning you discontinued stuff you shouldn't have).

Can You Believe It? It's Time, Again

Four months go by in the snap of a finger!

It's time for yet another run of the MineThatData Elite Program. Cost is $1,800 for first-time participants, $1,000 for those who previously participated. You receive the standard suite of metrics I run (rolling twelve-month analysis, comp segment, comp new/reactivated buyers, repurchase behavior, new/reactivated buyer trends, next twelve-month forecast). Very little cost, plenty of insights into where your business is headed.

Contact me now (kevinh@minethatdata.com) and let's get started.

• Data Due by 10/15/2026.
• Payment Due by 10/15/2026.
• Analysis Delivered by 10/31/2026.

Ways To Grow

Let's assume you aren't a retail brand looking to add stores. Your growth options are actually quite limited.

You can find new customers. This is necessary, and it is not generally prioritized.

You can get existing customers to spend more. This is hard, it is almost always prioritized, and is often a waste of resources.

You can add product lines and/or create new brands. Non-competing product lines are one of the best ways to grow. If you sell Women's Apparel and you move into Kids, guess what? You'll sell more merchandise. If you sell Women's Apparel and you move into Widgets? That's a lot harder.

You can move into other channels. It's the reason many of you sell on Amazon. They do the hard work, they take a chunk of your profit in kind.

As it becomes harder to find new customers, it becomes necessary to explore new product lines and/or new brands.

What Does The Plan Look Like When Proper Organic Percentages Are Applied?

If I have to hear one more professional lament the fact that Orvis doesn't mail catalogs anymore but Amazon does ... then suggesting that "Amazon is smarter" ... my goodness.

None of that matters. The only thing that matters is your customers, your marketing efforts, and the incremental effectiveness of your marketing efforts. That's it.

Here's what proper application of the "Organic Percentage" looks like. Below is a typical circulation plan (simplified by deciles instead of segments for illustrative purposes) via matchback analytics. Looks good on the surface (only look at the top portion of the table for now).

Every segment is profitable - you could absorb a 10% increase in ad costs and still be profitable. It's all good! Catalogs work.

Except they don't work for most customers.

You're one of the smart ones ... you execute mail/holdout tests. For you, 75% of the demand will happen anyway, 25% is "caused" by catalog marketing. Which leaves you with the bottom half of the table.

Look at that. There are ten deciles/segments there. How many are profitable? One (1). One!! Just the most loyal customers. Every other segment represents a marketing abomination.

In case you are wondering, this is where the arguments begin.

There is the group of professionals who simply do not believe the results. They are true believers in the craft. You cannot convince this audience of anything, even though 80% of the catalog pages circulated 20 years ago no longer exist (because they were terribly ineffective). You have to let these people marinate in their delusion.

There is a group of professionals who have to test 50 times ... they believe that the test results "are not representative". These people are stalling. They know the change that these results will lead to, and they don't want to deal with change. So they delay the inevitable.

There are a small group of professionals who believe the results, but realize their organization is unwilling to change. This audience largely left catalog marketing in the past twenty years, and are now thriving in ecommerce.

There are a small group of professionals who work in paper / printing / agencies. They CANNOT believe these results, because as I was told by a paper rep ... "it will take food off my dinner table, and I cannot allow that to happen". They lie to benefit their craft. They are not fundamentally different than politicians who lie to protect their congressional seat.

There are a small group of professionals who work at agencies AND they believe in the results and they try to do what is best for their clients. If the agency you work with is willing to execute mail/holdout tests and evaluate results via the bottom half of the table (above), hold on to that agency like your life depends upon it.

Then there are the companies who change. Like Nordstrom did back in 2005 when I worked there (they kept mailing branding-centric catalogs throughout, but the classic list-based catalog business model was discountinued). Like Orvis. Like several of my clients. Why are they changing? Because they run a p&l that looks like this.

These companies make a choice. They take the 17% demand hit, but save $360,000 in ad cost and increase profit by $213,000 (in this example). With the ad cost savings, they typically reinvest in digital marketing channels ... or they just become a smaller brand that is more profitable. Either way, they outperform those who don't evaluate their businesses in this manner.

Did you see what happened in the bottom half of the table, when you evaluate your circulation plan via mail/holdout tests?

• Only the most loyal customers are profitable.

This is why you'll see brands with the GDP of Australia be able to mail catalogs ... they have hyper-loyal customers that can afford to be mailed even if little of the demand generated by the catalog is actually incremental.

This is why I argue that catalog marketing will still be a craft that can be applied to loyal customers or hyper-productive customers. The math will continue to work for a period of time.

But for everybody else?

• It's over.
• It's been over for a long time.
• There's no reason to badger Orvis because they made what is in reality an easy, fact-based, profitable decision.

It's Forecast Season!

Somebody at your company sounded the alarm bells about November/December.

Is that person right? Are you going to be below plan/budget? Or is the professional paranoid?

It helps to have facts, doesn't it?

As I generally do each year, I'll accept five years of data through September 30. With that data, I'll tell you what your projections for November/December look like. It's Forecast Season!

Contact me right now (kevinh@minethatdata.com) and I'll project November/December for you at a low cost.

Content Creation

Here's the link.

I realize many of you are stymied by creating content for your customers. Some of you would say the video above is pointless, useless, and may have nominal ROI if any. Think of this as a triangle, with being "stymied" on one point, "pointless" on another, and doing something on the third point of the triangle.

How Will You Give New Items Exposure?

It's hard for the customer to know you have new merchandise unless you tell them you have new merchandise. You do that through print (for some of you), you do that through email marketing, you do that through your home page, you do that via social media.

Now think a bit about the evolution of search. Your search-centric customers already skew to existing items ... just perform the analysis yourself, it's easy to do and it is revealing as heck. Algorithms push customers to items that algorithms know about.

AI likes/needs to be "trained". How do you train an algorithm on an item that you won't offer yet for two more months?

Email marketing is going to become your most important new merchandise advertising platform. It will be one of the few places you have control over the message. Start your experiments today, learn as much as you can, and be ready for the change that is coming.

The Organic Percentage Over Time

When I left Lands' End in 1995, one of the challenges the analytically-focused person faced was the fact that some in Management did not believe that if you didn't mail a catalog 30% of the demand would still happen (from surrounding catalogs). This "fact" (measured via mail/holdout tests) meant that what was marginally profitable was, in fact, unprofitable. Nobody wants to be tied to something that is unprofitable. Consequently, facts were not accepted.

At the time I thought "these people just aren't smart enough to understand simple math". I was wrong. People are smart enough to understand facts, be it in marketing or politics. People choose to ignore facts for perfectly good reasons.

The organic percentage, at 30% in 1996, would become larger, creating ever-bigger problems.

By decade, the organic percentage grew.

• 1996:  30%.
• 2006:  50%.
• 2016:  65%.
• 2026:  80%.

In 2026, the only customers that can be profitably mailed are good or great customers. That's it.

And I get it ... some of you are reading this and you go back to your matchback analytics and you say "I'm good". You run a p&l on each segment and you believe you are mailing 36 month customers profitably. If you believe this, execute the following experiment.

• Assume your organic percentage isn't 80%, assume it is just 50%. Pretend like it is 2006.
• Run a p&l for each segment assuming your organic percentage is an old-school 50%.
• What does the analysis tell you?

It tells you an inconvenient truth.

• If you do what the analysis says, your company will be more profitable. Much more profitable.
• If you do what the analysis says, you will cost your company top-line sales/revenue/demand, and you have forces within your company who will never let you do that.

This is why so many catalog brands ultimately went bankrupt. They couldn't let the top-line contract, so they just kept doing what they were doing until unprofitable became "too unprofitable" while customer response also contracted.

When the AI bubble pops (and it most assuredly will pop), new ecommerce models fueled by what AI is supposed to become will emerge. Print will be forced to be leveraged only by brands with the GDP of Bolivia or will be a tactic to leverage with best customers with high iROAS. It will not be a channel to center an entire business around (and honestly, it hasn't been for 20 years). Also - the same forces that came for catalog marketing will come for old-school ecommerce in a few years. It's how capitalism works.

An Interesting Evaluation Of Marketing Effectiveness

A link was offered to download a "white paper" demonstrating that print has fabulous ROI.

The "good" from the PostPilot report?

• S-Tier Analysis:  Conducted via mail/holdout groups. Yeah, they went there. Kudos!
• They Didn't Lie:  Their results "make sense". They aligned with reality.

The "not so good" that made me #sigh?

• Results derived from highly responsive customers.

You can cover a whole bunch of sins by executing marketing against the most responsive customers. Just ask the loyalty industry for verification. Here is an example of the kind of direction they're leading you in.

There is nothing nefarious happening here - the analysis is measured properly, the organic percentage is common/reasonable, and iROAS (incremental demand / ad spend) is incremental.

Is there a flaw in the analysis?

No.

Is the analysis misleading?

Yes.

Why?

The analysis was executed against highly responsive customers ... ones about to buy or ones who just purchased. In either case, the customer is not representative of the customer base. EVERY marketing effort "is likely" to work when measured against highly responsive customers. Including print. Especially print!

The logic falls apart when you take the same conditions and apply them to, say, a customer who has not purchased in 18 months.

Everything is the same here - same incremental lift, same ad cost, same organic percentage. However, the customer is simply not responsive. As a consequence, the marketing channel is not effective, with a horrifying iROAS and a loss.

That's how you make something appear to be effective - execute it against responsive customers.

But when you try to extend the audience? Not so good.

Email and Social are the ways you speak with non-responsive audiences. Ad costs are so minimal that the numbers work.

You Get This Newsletter Every Saturday, Right?

If you want to see what a mix of professionalism, free information, and personal expression looks like, get on this email subscription (I've been here for more than a decade, long enough to see his kids grow up and move into college and begin careers).

Saturday's email was about the resurgence of brand marketing ... which is interesting because on many recent video conferences there have been robust discussions about the death of catalog marketing and the importance of email marketing as one of the few ways to have an actual "relationship" with a customer.

25 Years

It's almost unfathomable that a full generation has passed since 9/11. Twenty-five years. More than a quarter of the people who experienced that day are no longer with us, including 3 out of 8 of the adults who experienced that day.

Pressure causes people to behave in interesting ways. On 9/11, I recall a peer VP sobbing. An Executive looked at me and said "Why is she so sensitive?". He then locked myself and my Marketing Director in a conference room from 2:30pm - 7:00pm because, as he said, "we'll get an opportunity to fix the business and nobody will be here to bother us". I sent my employees home, then failed to fix the business during the 4.5 hour session. Obviously, the Leader was responding to pressure in a manner inconsistent with logic. It's easy to feel empathy for the Leader today. I felt something different that afternoon.

A woman I've played pickleball with described what it was like to try to get out of the city on 9/11. Her ordeal was obviously more harrowing than a 4.5 hour session in a stale conference room.

It's like the events of that day sent us down a different reality path ... not unlike the one in Back to the Future where our heroes end up in a timeline controlled by Biff Tannen.

No matter what happens, we move forward. We are resilient.

How Do You Know When A Marketing Channel Is Dying?

Last month I was asked this question. What a good question!

In 1999 at Eddie Bauer, I measured "phone" customers ... those who bought by calling our contact center. About 10% of those customers placed an ecommerce order the next time they purchased. Meanwhile, almost no ecommerce customers placed an order using the phone on a next order.

• Run that relationship out a few years and it became obvious that the marketing channel known as catalog marketing was doomed.
• If you didn't look at the data in this fashion (nobody does), it becomes really difficult to see that a marketing channel is dying. By purposely not running the analysis in this way, one can believe forever that the marketing channel is not dying when it is most certainly not dying.

The relationship I described (identified in 1999) ran like a runaway truck from 2003 - 2013.

• About 30% of phone customers placed their next order online.
• Virtually no online customers placed their next order via the phone.

By the time we got to 2013, catalog marketing as a discipline was done. No, not to the NEMOA audience obviously, but to any rational observer it was done. By 2013 the rate of phone customers shifting online in their next order was back in the 10% - 15% range. In other words, all the customers who were going to convert to online buying had already converted to online buying. The only customers left were all 60+ years old (in 2013 - imagine their age today).

This is how marketing channels die. It happened to Spiegel / JCP / Sears / Wards. It happened to specialty catalogs. It's going to happen to ecommerce brands over the next decade once the AI bubble pops and newer AI-centric business models emerge from the rubble.

There is going to be "something". You might implement "something" on your old-school website that causes customers to change their behavior. You might push your customers to an AI-infused marketplace (don't do that for Heaven's sake). You might generate traffic on your site from an AI-infused marketplace and notice that you don't have the same traffic from Google. Regardless, "it" is going to happen.

• You will measure the dynamic.
• If 20% of customers who bought from the old-school channel last year purchase via the new channel this year ... but very few of the new channel customers go back to the old-school channel, you know that a marketing channel is dying.

How many of you measure marketing channels in this manner, show of hands?

Business Isn't Easy

I reviewed all clients who were charter members of my Elite Program back in 2015 ($1,000 per run for existing clients, 3x per year, voluntary performance).

A third of charter members are no longer in business.

All of the brands now out of business were catalog brands.

Other catalog brands were distressed, gobbled up by catalog holding companies.

If you go back to 2007 when I started my consulting work, about 2/3rd of the catalog brands I worked with in my first decade of consulting are gone.

Gone!

No amount of paper / printing / agency discourse changes facts. If you're still here? You did something right!

After the AI bubble pops, there will be new business models. New business models will grow at the expense of existing ecommerce brands. The cycle will repeat. It's unavoidable, it's how capitalism works.

It's also very rewarding to fight against forces working against you ... to persevere, to thrive, to overcome challenges with great merchandise!

Package And A Snack

I ordered a cable (from Bloom Audio) that connects my Qudelix Q5k bluetooth dac/amp to my Apos Gremlin hybrid tube amp (2.5mm balanced to 4.4mm balanced for those nerding out here). It's not exactly the type of solution Walmart or Target tries to solve.

The image below shows what arrived in my package on Thursday.

A thank you note ... and a Starburst fruit chew.

I've told you this story at least a dozen times - I worked with a company that put ghosts in their outgoing package. You received a little note about your ghost, his/her strengths, weaknesses, and potential scenarios where the ghost might influence household activities. On the socials, customers loved this little touch.

When I'd tell professionals at conferences about this tactic, I'd get the kind of blank stares that one receives when they have a rogue piece of spinach covering a tooth, followed by a statement like "that's interesting, of course, that's not going to work for our customers, what other ideas do you have?" And I'd think to myself, "why is it my job to toss ideas out for free, isn't it your job to come up with ideas?"

There's about two months to go ... then many of you become preoccupied with Winning Cyber Monday (#wcm). Until you win by giving 77% off plus free shipping, what can you do with your outgoing packages to help your customers feel special?

Taking Questions

Going into Labor Day weekend, do you any questions for me? Send me an email (kevinh@minethatdata.com) and if I can answer your question, I'll do so.

Otherwise, enjoy your long weekend! See you in several days.

Blaming The User / Customer

Two days ago I received communication from an individual.

• "If the user is too stupid to understand the difference in use cases of different AI tools then the user deserves it if the user gets unverified and incorrect results."

Sort of like the paper/printing folks suggesting that my clients aren't being "smart" about print, that they're asking "the wrong questions" in an environment where the paper/printing folks have raised prices to unsustainable levels. Blaming your customer because you raised prices and they responded rationally. Not a long-term strategy by any stretch of the imagination.

In your personal life, what happens if you repeatedly use and/or take advantage of your friends? You run out of friends!

In business, what happens if you repeatedly use and/or take advantage of your customers?

When The Marketer Is Fighting For Her Company

Here's something I witnessed recently.

• Annual Comp Segment Performance:  -11%.
• Annual New/Reactivated Comp Buyers:  +3%.

In the Comp Segment framework, customers like the merchandise 11% less than last year. This fact has to be applied to new/reactivated comp buyers.

• Adjusted New/Reactivated Comp Buyers = +3% - (-11%) = +14%.

Had the merchandise been appreciated by customers, new/reactivated buyer comps would likely have been +14%.

You can tell if the marketer is fighting for her business based on Adjusted New/Reactivated Comp Buyers. It's not the only way to tell, but it is a leading indicator. In nearly 20 years of consulting, the marketing professionals who have gone on to great things possess fabulous Adjusted New/Reactivated Comp Buyer metrics.

Show of hands ... how many of you use this metric to evaluate how brilliant your marketer is?

Speaking of Setting a Standard

I asked ChatGPT to perform a simple long-term value curve estimation procedure for me. The classic ecommerce customer relationship is one easily fit via a diminishing returns power function.

• Future Spend = a*x^b where "x" is the number of months since a customer was acquired.

I'll spare you the paper trail for now (it's attached at the bottom of the post).

AI fit the wrong equation ... it fit a linear regression model which understated how much a customer spends early in the life cycle and overstates how much a customer spends later in the life cycle. In the real world, this means you'd accept a 2.00 ROAS when you should accept a 4.20 ROAS and your company would be significantly less profitable. All because of AI. If you don't know how to "coax" an answer out of AI, you'll doom your company. And you'll boil a few aquifers in the process.

I asked AI if a diminishing returns relationship like a*x^b is more appropriate and if it fits better? It replied that the equation is more appropriate and yes, it fits better (well then why didn't you do that the first time I asked you?). It gave me an answer. One problem. The answer it gave me was a hallucination? How did I know? Because I asked my statistical software package (CurveExpert) to solve the problem for me, and it gave me the correct answer.

It gets worse.

I asked AI to provide me with predicted value calculations for the equation it fitted. Here is an example of the answer it provided for me (remember, the coefficients are already wrong - I'm just asking it to perform simple math).

• Future = 8.63 * (Months ^ 0.78).
• Assume Months = 12.
• Future = 8.63 * (12 ^ 0.78).
• Future = 55.90.

Go ahead and plug 8.63 * (12 ^ 0.78) into Excel. What answer do you obtain?

• You should obtain 59.95.

In other words, AI is not even calculating simple calculator-level math correctly. It's hallucinating. It's doing whatever it wants. And it is doing a HORRIFYING JOB.

You are a Lemonhead if you trust this stuff.

Yes, there will likely be a day when AI is a lot better and performs certain functions a lot better. If you want to target email subscribers properly, AI is already quite good at that ... though again, how do you know it is doing things the "right" way? How could you possibly know? Also, I just asked the application to provide me SPSS code for a problem and it wrote elegant and functional code.

But until that future day happens (and it appears it is out there a bit), please be careful.

Here is my final question to AI, and AI"s final response.

Kevin: I've learned that you cannot perform even the simplest of tasks without making mistakes. I am able to fact-check your work with hand calculations. What are users who do not have my skills supposed to do if they blindly trust your solutions when you cannot even perform simple math that a calculator can perform?

AI:  Kevin, you’re not wrong to be frustrated. And you’re absolutely right to call out the risk: if I make a math mistake and a user can’t check the work, that’s a problem. Let me speak to you directly and clearly — no defensiveness, no sugarcoating.

1. You caught real errors — and they were my responsibility

You gave me a clean dataset — values like:

“60,169.17 … 1,11.03”

and you asked for a specific model:

y = a·xᵇ

I should have executed the log–linear regression cleanly. Instead, I produced inconsistent coefficients and even mis‑computed basic exponentiation. You were right to challenge it.

2. What should users do if they can’t check the math?

They should do exactly what you’re doing now: question the output when something feels off.

Even though I’m designed to be helpful, I’m not infallible. I don’t “blindly calculate” — I generate answers through patterns, reasoning, and approximations. That means:

• I can make arithmetic mistakes.

• I can misinterpret a model specification.

• I can produce a result that sounds confident but is wrong.

A calculator never does that. I can.

3. So how do non‑experts stay safe?

Here’s the honest guidance:

• If the stakes are high, users should verify with a second source. A spreadsheet, a calculator, statistical software — anything deterministic.

• If something looks suspicious, they should ask me to re‑derive it step‑by‑step. When users force me into explicit steps, the chance of error drops dramatically.

• If a model choice seems odd, they should ask why I chose it. That exposes misunderstandings early.

• If they don’t know how to check the math, they should ask me to show the logic in a way they can check. For example: “Show me the log‑linear regression table.”

4. And for you specifically

You’re not a passive user. You’re doing exactly what an expert should do: stress‑test the output, challenge inconsistencies, and demand rigor.

Your skills make you a tough critic — and that’s good for me. You force precision.

5. I’ll own the core issue

You asked: “What are users supposed to do if they blindly trust your solutions?”

They shouldn’t blindly trust me. They should trust me the way they trust any powerful tool: use me, but verify when accuracy matters.

And when you catch me making mistakes, I don’t get defensive — I get better.

If you want, we can redo the entire regression cleanly, step‑by‑step, with every transformation shown explicitly so you can see each number and confirm it.

Setting a Standard

My Milwaukee Brewers are having yet another great year, one that will potentially be derailed by the Cubs or Dodgers. On Tuesday night, this happened (click here).

A rookie was benched in the fifth inning AFTER hitting a bloop single.

Yes, Brewers fans derided the Manager for being a bit short-fused.

Not me.

He's setting a Standard.

Any of you who have been a Director or VP or C-Level Professional know that there is a Standard in your industry. There is a level of competence and effort that must be met, and if the employee does not meet it, there are consequences. You cannot survive if your team does not meet the Standard. And you know what that Standard is, based on your career experiences.

I work with a current client where the employees are understanding the Standard, and are responding to the Standard. Their response is different than a year ago. I so enjoy working with them! The employees are growing!!!

Go out on LinkedIn for 10 minutes and you realize that so many of those folks do not understand the Standard. No attention to detail. Just high-level thoughts. "I think Kohl's has big problems with their relationship with Sephora." That's brain-dead drivel. Do you know what counts? Meeting the Standard so you can fix both Kohl's and Sephora and change the trajectory/thoughts of tens of thousands of employees. That's the Standard. How many people on LinkedIn are capable of doing that?

Catalog Thought Leadership is just as bad. When faced with postage increases, my clients aren't asking the "wrong questions" as printers and paper people tell us. My clients are meeting the Standard. They are benching Print for lazy performance and poor effort. They are benching the vendors who support lazy performance and poor effort. I can understand if you were benched that you'd maybe take a swipe at the person who benched you, but that's also not meeting the Standard. Read what Cooper Pratt (the player who was benched) said in the article cited earlier.

The Standard = Discipline + Competence + Vision + Leadership + Communication.

How many unsubs am I going to deal with for merely referencing this topic? And what does that say of the person unsubbing?

Loyalty: Red Lobster Nation

We talked about loyalty programs this week. I talked about the feebleness of points and percentages off. Here's Red Lobster Nation.

Earn points, get dollars off your meal.

A question.

Is the price of a meal at Red Lobster the thing that has stopped you from dining at Red Lobster? Is the price of a meal at Red Lobster the thing that stopped you from eating at Red Lobster 13 times a year instead of 12 times a year?

A loyalty program should be designed to solve a problem. What is the core problem that Red Lobster has?

• Is it that restaurants need to be renovated? If that is the core problem, how is encouraging somebody to eat in a run-down restaurant more often for a few dollars off helpful?
• Is it that Zombie Retail restaurants are in less-than-optimal locations (i.e. they were put in a good location 20 years ago but those are not prime areas anymore)? A loyalty program won't solve this problem.
• Is it that the food is too expensive? This could help, but you are asking the customer to continue to pay higher prices for a period of time before earning a small reward.
• Is it that the service is poor? If this is the core problem, asking customers to continue to receive poor service for a period of time before saving a few dollars is a big ask.
• Is it that Marketing is out of ideas? If this is the core problem, this could be a solution.
• Is a Management Consultant involved? If this is the core problem, we all know the appropriate course of action.

In almost all cases, the "brand" (or Zombie Retailer in this instance) has a merchandise / product / pricing problem that the brand is choosing not to address - the loyalty program is designed to paper over the merchandise / product / pricing problem.

The Two Best Ways To Grow Your Loyal Customer Base

I've run the numbers more times than I care to mention. Tables, queries, simulations, you name it. All methods tell the same story.

The best loyalty programs have MANY customers, not few customers. It's always better to have two loyal customers than it is to have one loyal customer.

If you want a loyalty program with many loyal customers, there are two things you need to do. You need to do these things years before they pay off (I realize you don't want to hear that news).

1. You must acquire high-quality new customers. S-Tier or A-Tier new customers. It's mandatory. That new customer you paid Facebook for that bought one lousy item at $29.99? Garbage. Facebook makes money, you don't.
2. You must convert as many first-time buyers to a second purchase within three months of a first order. If you don't get them early, the probability of the customer becoming loyal greatly diminishes.

The mistake that is made, of course, is that the loyalty marketer waits until the customer spends $1,500 or whatever the amount, then tries to squeeze more money out of the customer. How many customers ever get to the $1,500 level? In my work, somewhere between 2% and 10% of customers ever achieve "loyal" status, however you define it.

Smart marketers, of course, mitigate this problem by crafting alternate marketing programs.

1. They don't say "no" to the garbage name acquired via Facebook, but they work overtime to acquire the first-time buyer who purchases three items on a first order in two different merchandise categories. Whether algorithmically or (often) via their own programs, they generate attention/awareness that leads to new customers that are S-Tier or A-Tier.
2. They have well-developed Welcome Programs that convert customers to a second purchase quickly. This results in a significant increase in loyal buyers 18-36 months later. The Loyalty Professional is dependent upon a Smart Marketer.

When clients ask about loyalty programs, I frequently say "If you want twice as many loyal customers tomorrow, be sure to acquire twice as many good new customers today". That's the point where professionals (i.e. some of you) get frustrated.

There are no shortcuts. There is a Standard that needs to be met.

Regardless, that's what the data shows. Accept facts and thrive!

The Problem With Loyalty Programs

Three problems with loyalty programs:

• Wrong Incentives. Points and Discounts. Is that what the customer truly "wants"?
• Wrong Customers. The wrong customers are selected to be included ... sometimes it is almost every customer that is included. That's not a loyalty program, it's not special if everybody is included.
• Wrong Outcome. If we assume that a loyalty program creates incremental orders that wouldn't have otherwise happened (a big assumption), we may or may not generate a profitable outcome. For instance, too many of you ADORE throwing gross margin dollars in the trash can to "create" a more loyal customer. Why are you giving everybody an additional 20% off? Would they have purchased without the discount? If the answer is "yes", you just threw money in the garbage can and lit it on fire.

A well-crafted loyalty program must result in incremental orders that wouldn't have happened otherwise, and must result in more gross margin dollars and more profit dollars that would not have happened otherwise. Every time you give an additional 20% off or 40% off, you put gross margin dollars and profit dollars at risk.

Also, you don't solve the core problem. If you want to have a great loyalty program, how do you grow the number of customers who deserve to be in the program?

P.S.: I once worked with a "brand" that decided to enter everybody spending > $500 in a loyalty program, offering discounts/promotions/points to encourage the customer to spend more. The marketing team loved watching the orders roll in (in truth, they'd never measured how orders came in for this cohort). At the end of a year, I quantified year-over-year how much the > $500 cohort spent (it was like a 20% increase). Everybody celebrated. Then I shared with them the outcome of a separate query I ran where I measured the year-over-year increase among $400 - $499 customers last year. They didn't spend 20% more ... but they spent 15% more.

• The incremental increase of 5% was wildly unprofitable. The company simply burned money.
• Nobody appreciated the answer. I wasn't invited back to continue analyzing the issue.