SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: TobagoJack who wrote (34576)6/1/2003 5:05:25 AM
From: elmatador  Respond to of 74559
 
To Andrea Jung, a persistently rotten economy is a beautiful thing. Sounds like you Jay!

In a Dull Economy, Avon Finds a Hidden Gloss
By CLAUDIA H. DEUTSCH

Andrea Jung, chief of Avon Products, says sales representatives will not defect to more upscale rivals when the economy improves.

To Andrea Jung, a persistently rotten economy is a beautiful thing.

Others may see falling sales, lower profits and layoffs. Ms. Jung, the chief executive of the Avon Products Company, sees an ever larger pool of women she can recruit to sell Avon products to an equally large pool of women who cannot afford department store creams.

"I always knew there was a lot more organic growth in Avon's direct sales methods, but even I thought it would take longer to see it," Ms. Jung, 44, said.

Advertisement


Indeed, Avon's army of sales representatives — the modern title for the anachronistic "Avon ladies" — grew by 10 percent last year, to nearly four million. At the same time, Avon's unit sales rose 13 percent worldwide — and by 40 percent in Russia and other parts of Eastern Europe, a region that Ms. Jung calls "Avon heaven." The company says that more than 60 percent of its sales are outside the United States.

And younger customers are joining the Avon fold. In 1999, when Ms. Jung became the first woman to head Avon, its typical customer was 43; today she is 37.

"Society is overstored and underserviced," said George Rosenbaum, chairman of Leo J. Shapiro & Associates, a market research firm in Chicago. "The upshot is that Avon's ancient technique of face-to-face selling has become highly contemporary and relevant again."

Investors, too, think that Avon, which has met or beaten Wall Street earnings expectations the last two years, is on a roll. According to Thomson First Call, Avon has the strongest buy recommendations of companies that sell personal-care products. Avon shares have climbed more than 15 percent over the last year, hitting a record of $60.89 on Friday.

The company is also attracting some high-style publicity. "Avon products are all over Allure, Marie Claire and other glossy magazines where they were never mentioned before," said William H. Steele, an analyst at Banc of America Securities.

Amy Low Chasen, an analyst at Goldman Sachs, was more effusive. "This is one of the highest-quality growth stocks that I cover," she said.

Avon's sales in the first quarter rose 7 percent, to $1.46 billion, and profit increased 3 percent, to $98.9 million. For all of 2002, sales rose 4 percent, to $6.17 billion, while profit jumped 20 percent, to $534.6 million.

But if Avon is such a winner in a losing economy, will it be a loser in a winning one?

"Avon does well in a recession, because it provides low-cost items that are sold by women who cannot move up in the workplace," said Allan G. Mottus, a consultant to the beauty industry and publisher of The Informationist, a trade publication. "In a full economy, a lot of good people are going to defect."

In an interview, Ms. Jung said that such defections never followed past economic upturns — and that new incentive programs, product lines, pricing strategies and an overall image-burnishing strategy would hold customers and sales representatives in place anyway. She noted that Avon had wrenched costs out of its purchasing and manufacturing procedures and that its cash flow and operating margins were climbing.

But industry experts are sounding alarm bells. They note that rivals, many of which have more money to spend on marketing, are revving up their new-product mills.

Mr. Mottus points to the inroads that L'Oréal and others are making in the Hispanic market, which Avon was among the first to cultivate. Procter & Gamble, meanwhile, recently introduced Olay Regenerist, an anti-wrinkle cream aimed squarely at women 35 and older, Avon's core market.

"Sure, Avon is in the crowd of competitors that want to compete with Olay, but we've got sophisticated products and I'm just not worried," said Bobbie Jo Ehlers, the North American brand manager for Olay Skin Care.

Investors are becoming jittery. "I've never been comfortable with Avon's heavy reliance on direct sales," said Alison Kerivan, a managing director at David L. Babson & Company, an investment firm in Cambridge, Mass. She said she saw Procter & Gamble and other, more diversified household products companies as a safer bet. "If I'm going to buy a pricey stock," she said, "I'd prefer one that gets its growth from a more diverse group of products."

Diversification has never been Avon's strong suit. In the last two decades it has tried — and failed — at upscale retailing (it even owned Tiffany's from 1979 to 1984), and at using toll-free telephone numbers for ordering. "They'd try a strategy, and if it didn't work, six months later they'd try something else," Ms. Chasen of Goldman Sachs recalled

(Page 2 of 2)


Y November 1999, when most companies were riding an economy-driven high, Avon's board was fed up with the company's floundering. It replaced Charles R. Perrin — whom Avon had brought in from Duracell International just 18 months earlier — with Ms. Jung, who had come to Avon in 1994 from Neiman Marcus.

Some of Ms. Jung's diversification attempts have fizzled, too. Earlier this year, she struck a deal to have J. C. Penney carry beComing, Avon's new line of midpriced cosmetics. Penney pulled the brand after just a few months.

Advertisement


"We wouldn't have given up a product that was profitable," a Penney spokeswoman said. She added that Penney is using the space to display fashion jewelry, which she said yields higher returns than cosmetics.

Ms. Jung, who said she believed that Penney had not done enough to build up a big cosmetics presence in the stores, is philosophical about the failure. "We didn't bet the ranch on it," she said, "and it was a good learning experience."

Retail does not fit into her current strategy, anyway. For some time she has been seeking ways to make Avon immune to economic and demographic swings, anything beyond its immediate control. Her conclusion, apparently, has been that it is better to deepen Avon's reach than to broaden it.

She has thought her strategies through. During a nearly three-hour interview at Avon's headquarters in Midtown Manhattan, she exuded confidence but not cockiness. When presented with a list of looming and seemingly formidable obstacles, she calmly ticked off her solutions:

• Is Avon's core baby-boomer market aging? She has weeded out apparel, toys and other products that do not fit Avon's self-image as a personal-care company for women. In place of those lines, Avon is promoting vitamins, weight-control programs and other "wellness" offerings aimed at women 35 and over. In August, it will introduce Mark. cosmetics, to be used — and sold — by young women. (The punctuation is part of the name because "it emphasizes young women making their mark," Ms. Jung explained.) Avon expects to jump-start the line by having representatives introduce it to their daughters.

• Is its image down-market and dated? She has introduced classier brochures printed on glossier papers. And she is promoting Avon's upscale spa on Fifth Avenue in New York, an easy walk from Bergdorf Goodman, Henri Bendel and other tony emporiums that Avon customers are unlikely to patronize. "That spa gives us the `wow' factor, which makes it wonderful image advertising," Ms. Jung said.

• Will sales representatives flee to better jobs when the market picks up? She has made their jobs more lucrative. Avon has helped about 100 sales representatives open their own Avon kiosks at various shopping malls. It has helped its best sales representatives create Web pages of their own. And it has dusted off an old Avon program, called Sales Leadership, in which they are taught how to recruit, train and supervise their own stable of representatives.

• Will women be able to afford higher-priced products in an upturn? Avon, once stuck on keeping most prices under $10, has introduced Ultimate, a line of skin creams that cost $30, and has other midpriced products in the pipeline. Ms. Jung has designated $100 million to build a new research and development center and has set up research partnerships with universities and other companies, all aimed at churning out more such products. "Our items will still be less expensive than equivalent items from Maybelline or L'Oréal or Olay, but we can certainly command more than the $8.99 we might charge now," she said.

OST of the changes are aimed at improving the image that Avon presents to the outside world. But many are lifting internal productivity, too. One byproduct of the Sales Leadership program is that Avon has not had to hire more regional managers even as the number of sales representatives has grown.

"With this program, the sales representatives replicate the district managers many times over," said Angelo Rossi, group vice president for sales and customer care at Avon in the United States.

Once the Sales Leadership program is entrenched, Ms. Jung may even again consider diversifying product lines. If Avon is a master of direct sales, why not use its representatives to sell financial services and such? If women are becoming more health conscious, why not add more wellness products — or open more Avon spas?

"The concept of being a multibrand, multichannel company is still here," she said. "But it's the single brand and single channel that's going to take us through 2007."



To: TobagoJack who wrote (34576)6/1/2003 5:25:46 AM
From: elmatador  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 74559
 
The next bubble to pop?

May 29th 2003
From The Economist print edition

Your home may be worth less than you think



STILL smarting from losses on equities and a shrivelling private pension? Wait until you see what happens to the value of your house. Far too many people have decided in recent years that, in these uncertain times, the safest investment is bricks and mortar. Real house prices in many places have been rising at their fastest-ever rate. Can this go on?

The answer, as our survey in this week's issue argues, is clearly no. But will house prices flatten or will they crash? The fate of the world economy could hinge on the answer. Since the stockmarket slump, rising property prices have been a crucial prop for many economies. If house prices were now to go into reverse, this could have far graver consequences than did the fall in stockmarkets. Households have more money tied up in property than in shares, and they tend to borrow more. Falls in GDP after previous housing busts have been larger than after stockmarket crashes.

Most analysts still argue that a sharp fall in house prices is unlikely. They claim that low interest rates mean that people can afford to pay more for a home. But real interest rates are not low. If nominal interest rates are low mainly because inflation is low, wages will also grow more slowly, so future mortgage-interest payments will be a bigger burden than in the past.

House of cards
May 29th 2003

America's economy

Britain's economy


A second argument deployed by house-price bulls is that previous busts have been triggered by higher interest rates. With inflation so low, interest rates are unlikely to go up now. In the near future, this argument may be right. But both Japan and Germany, where house prices have fallen steadily over the past decade, show that low interest rates are no protection against a decline in house prices. A third popular argument for why house prices can keep rising focuses on supply constraints. Yet this argument too is flawed. Hong Kong is shorter of land than anywhere in the world; yet property prices there have fallen by two-thirds in the past five years.

Bogus arguments puffing house prices higher have led investors mistakenly to ignore more traditional gauges of value. Yet just as share prices cannot for long outpace the growth of profits, so house prices cannot long rise faster than incomes. Looking at ratios of house prices to both rents and average wages, our survey finds that houses are significantly overvalued in 13 countries. The ratios are near all-time highs in America, Australia, Britain, Ireland, the Netherlands and Spain.

None of this means that house prices are sure to collapse; they could just stagnate. But there are reasons to expect prices to fall in nominal terms. In the past, high inflation has allowed overvalued assets to adjust without the need for a big drop in prices. In a world of near-zero inflation, nominal prices are more likely to need to fall. A second reason why a decline in nominal house prices is likely is the growth of the “buy-to-let” market in such countries as Britain, Australia and Ireland. House prices are stickier than equity prices, because the financial and emotional cost of selling is large; if prices wobble, most owner-occupiers stay put, as they have to live somewhere. But buy-to-let investors are more likely to sell.

Even so, the housing market may not have a sudden big crash, as the stockmarket has. Instead, house prices are more likely to slide slowly down over the next four years. With the global economy already so fragile, and some countries poised on the brink of deflation, the result will be uncomfortable at best—and painful at worst. But that is what happens when bubbles are blown up and burst.