 |
|
|
|||||
There’s an ear-piercing war brewing at the mall. Claire’s, the biggest player in the market, has hit hard times, leaving room for upstarts to impinge on its territory. For 60 years, Claire’s has billed itself as a place for kids and teens to get their first piercings. The company says it has pierced more than 100 million ears since 1978. But after declaring bankruptcy in August (its second bankruptcy in seven years), Claire’s was acquired by the holding company Ames Watson for $140 million. These new owners have plans to turn the business around, including drastically shrinking its retail footprint which had ballooned to more than 1,000 stores. It recently announced it is shuttering upwards of 290 locations across the country. And Rowan, an ear-piercing startup, has told Fast Company that it is planning to start taking over some of these locations starting with a store in New Hampshire and outside of Boston. [Photo: courtesy Rowan] Building a piercing empire Claire’s continues to be a large player in the ear-piercing world. Last year it generated upwards of $2 billion in revenue, but it has also accumulated $500 million in debt from a leveraged buyout. It has struggled to pay off this debt because its profits have declined due to slowing foot traffic at mall and increased tariffs. But more broadly, while many millennials still remember Claire’s fondly from their own teenage years, the retailer has not evolved to meet the needs of today’s consumers. The stores feel like a warehouse, crammed with cheap trinkets. The ear-piercing experience doesn’t feel particularly luxurious, as retail staff perform the procedure while also manning the checkout. As Claire’s has declined, many other alternatives have popped up, including Louvisa, a Claire’s-like brand from Australia; Studs, a startup focused on older teens and adults; and Banter, a piercing-focused brand owned by the jewelry giant Signet. Rowan, which was founded in 2017, is trying to unseat Claire’s as the go-to destination for a person’s first piercing. Louisa Schneider, Rowan’s founder and CEO, has worked hard to create an in-store experience that is clean and comfortable, particularly for children and their parents. It’s unique in the market for employing licensed nurses to perform the piercing, and it is able to pierce the ears of babies, which is an important rite of passage in many cultures. [Photo: Sandra Wong Geroux/courtesy Rowan] The startup, which generated $70 million in revenue last year, sees an opportunity in Claire’s downfall. It raised a $20 million series B in 2021, bringing its total funding to $25 million, and is working to expand its retail footprint. Now, it is quietly moving into many of Claire’s former locations. By the end of the year, Rowan expects to operate more than 100 ear-piercing studios and employ more than 800 people, more than half of which will be nurses. A better experience While Rowan and Claire’s overlap in some ways, the two businesses are also quite different. Claire’s is a retailer that specializes in selling cheap jewelry and knickknacks that are particularly appealing to the tween set. Ear-piercing is not its primary business, but for decades, the service has been a way to get customers through the door. Many millennials, who fondly remember getting their ears pierced at Claire’s, now bring their own kids to get their ears pierced for the first time. Louisa Schneider [Photo: courtesy Rowan] In contrast, Rowan’s entire business is focused on ear-piercing, which is the main source of the brand’s revenue. Schneider launched the business because she found a lot to be desired in the traditional mall ear-piercing experience. “When it came to my own daughter, I wanted the piercing to be the most important function of the person performing it, rather than an afterthought,” says Schneider. “But in many stores, overworked retail staff were being asked to perform a piercing, which is really a medical procedure. And they’re oftentimes dealing with a very young person.” At Rowan, Schneider has hired a team of licensed nurses who perform the piercings with either a needle or a device. It has small format stores that serve as piercing studios, with comfortable chairs where the procedure happens. [Photo: courtesy Rowan] The company also sells a wide range of earrings, most of which have a higher price point than those sold by Claire’s. Rowan spends a lot of time making sure that its products are hypoallergenic, to prevent irritation on newly pierced ears. Rowan also has an high-end line of 14k gold earrings, some of which are embedded with diamonds. But the majority of its revenue comes from the piercing service, which costs $35 for one ear and $50 for two ears, plus the cost of the jewelry. “We test all of our earrings to ensure they contain minimal nickel, brass, and other metals that are allergy inducing,” says Schneider. “We’re not a fashion jewelry store. Our focus is entirely on protecting newly pierced ears.” A growing market Until recently, piercing tended to be a service tacked on to jewelry stores, but over the past decade, it’s become clear that there is a market for ear-piercing as a stand-alone service. Studs, another startup, has also built a business around ear-piercing, but it only performs the service on people who are 13 and older. Rowan, on the other hand, tends to attract younger clients. “To have multiple piercings is now very common, even compared to 10 years ago,” says Schneider. “We’re seeing the demand for safe piercings go up.” [Photo: courtesy Rowan] Rowan is expanding its store footprint rapidly. Unlike some of its competitors, it’s a service that must happen in person, so it is imperative for the company to have brick-and-mortar stores. Schneider says that it has been able to take over many former Claire’s locations. While Claire’s has stores of many sizes, and in many locations, Schneider is rather selective with Rowan’s locations. It seeks out small-format stores, and also locations in the more premium parts of the mall, close to high-end brands. “Many Claire’s locations are near food courts,” Schneider says. “You’ll usually find Rowan close to the Apple store or Lululemon.” But while Rowan aspires to impinge on Claire’s territory, it is still much smaller than Claire’s. It generated $70 million last year, which is a small fraction of Claire’s $2 billion. But Claire’s has an uphill battle ahead to become profitable. It’s new owners have said that while the Claire’s brand is strong, it’s business model is “broken” and needs to be reimagined. Meanwhile, Schneider wants to stay laser focused on catering to the needs of its customers. “There are so many products you can get online now, but the reason you go to a store is because of the customer service,” she says. “That’s where we want to stand out.”
Category:
E-Commerce
Most American cities have street networks that are engineered for us to comfortably drive much too fast for our surroundings. Even our old, pre-automobile cities have been upgraded to make dangerous driving habits easy. Transportation professionals are allowed to use good judgment when deciding how to design city streets, but they often need to be reminded, especially in cities where the state department of transportation has authority. Its not enough for you as a good urbanist to tell an engineer to make better choices. After all, theyre not a malicious bunch trying to wreck society. Theyre conforming to the long-established rules of the industry. {"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"","headline":"Urbanism Speakeasy","description":"Join Andy Boenau as he explores ideas that the infrastructure status quo would rather keep quiet. To learn more, visit urbanismspeakeasy.com.","substackDomain":"https:\/\/www.urbanismspeakeasy.com\/","colorTheme":"green","redirectUrl":""}} The AASHTO Green Book is the go-to excuse that professionals use for street design that prioritizes vehicle speed and throughput at the expense of safety. (It costs a fortune, so find a library copy.) The costs of speed AASHTO says what many experts avoid admitting: Speed reduces the visual field, restricts peripheral vision, and limits the time available for drivers to receive and process information. The faster you drive, the less you see. And when you finally do see someone headed into your path, its too late to stop in time. The go with the flow justification for driving 40 mph around schools, homes, and storefronts causes preventable crashes, injuries, and fatalities. Engineers who read the Green Book will find this reminder about using judgment that goes beyond tables or graphs (emphasis mine): Design speed is a selected speed used to determine the various geometric design features of the roadway. The selected design speed should be a logical one with respect to the anticipated operating speed, topography, the adjacent land use, and the functional classification of the highway. In selection of design speed, every effort should be made to attain a desired combination of safety, mobility, and efficiency within the constraints of environmental quality, economics, aesthetics, and social or political impacts. Its still a highway-minded narrative, but theres flexibility in the language. So when professional engineers blame AASHTO for not implementing traffic calming measures, you know better. AASHTO expects licensed professionals to be conscientious problem solvers, not automated copy/pasters. A smarter approach Heres a two-step suggestion for having more productive conversations with the planners and engineers responsible for your areas street design: (1) Use plain language to talk about context, and (2) Share specific engineering methods that are approved by the status quo. Talking about context A house limits your ability to run. You walk from the bedroom to the kitchen. Guests visit, and they walk around and sit down. An open field gives you space to go as fast as your body motor allows. Friends and strangers can run with you, or in different directions. Some streets need to be engineered for slow driving. Some parts of the neighborhood are intended to be a living room, not an open field. Offering industry-approved options Its worth having some basic understanding of traffic calming techniques that are considered acceptable by status quo design guides, such as the AASHTO Green Book. Here are some notes to help get you started. Narrow lanes. 10-ft instead of 12-ft, even on the busy streets. Restriping is cheap and effective. Fewer lanes (road diet). Safer for people behind the wheel and people walking. Wide sidewalks. Most standard sidewalks arent even wide enough for two people to comfortably pass each other. Textured stripes / rumble strips. Used to transition from high-speed to low-speed areas. Textured pavement. Cobblestones arent your only option in the 21st century. Diverters. Popular on bike boulevards to prevent drivers from going straight across an intersection. Midblock crossings. Break up super blocks with flashing beacons for pedestrians. On-street parking. But it better be replacing car storage, not adding more! Chicanes. The S-curve feel that makes driving slightly uncomfortable. Trees. Along the sides and in the center of traffic circles and roundabouts. Roundabouts. Or traffic circles, depending on the type of intersection. Bumpouts / chokers. Theyll show tire marks from all the rubs, but thats progress. Use at intersections or midblock. Tight corners. 90 degrees if you please. No swooping curves. Street furniture. Benches, lights, trash cans, restaurant signs, bike racks, etc. Raised intersection. Pricey but effective way to put pedestrians on a pedestal. Raised crosswalk. Like a speed hump wide enough for people to walk across. If youre interested in going deeper, here are a few transportation resources to get you familiar with traffic calming. FHWA AASHTO ITE NACTO Global Designing Cities Initiative The bottom line: slower is safer. {"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"","headline":"Urbanism Speakeasy","description":"Join Andy Boenau as he explores ideas that the infrastructure status quo would rather keep quiet. To learn more, visit urbanismspeakeasy.com.","substackDomain":"https:\/\/www.urbanismspeakeasy.com\/","colorTheme":"green","redirectUrl":""}}
Category:
E-Commerce
Last week, Disney briefed the press on how it’s bringing the entire Hulu catalog into its Disney+ app, with a dedicated tab for accessing Hulu’s more adult-oriented fare. But despite all the headlines you might’ve seen about the Hulu app shutting down, Disney says it’s not happening anytime soon, if at all. According to Disney, the company has no timeline for getting rid of the dedicated Hulu app, and will continue to sell stand-alone Hulu subscriptions. The company still sees Hulu as an important part of its streaming strategy, serving as a catchall for content that doesn’t fall under tentpole Disney brands such as Star Wars and Marvel. Outside of the United States, Disney is even ditching the Star brand that it used for this type of content as it tries to make Hulu a recognizable brand globally. Jason Wong, Disney’s senior vice president of product management, tells Fast Company that Disney does want to shift Hulu subscribers over to its unified app. Both services are still growing and have a combined 183 million subscribers. A decision to wind down the stand-alone Hulu app, though, will depend on how customers respond to the Disney+ push. “Our strategy is to build up the Disney+ application and make it a great place for both Disney+ and Hulu users. If you want to consume Hulu on the stand-alone Hulu app, you can continue to do that,” Wong says. Hulu plus Disney+ Hulu launched in 2007 as a joint venture between NBC and Fox, with a focus on streaming network TV shows. Disney became Hulu’s majority owner after acquiring 21st Century Fox in 2019, and it bought out the remaining 33% stake from Comcast (which owns NBCUniversal) for $438.7 million in June. This gave Disney full ownership of a service with more than 55.5 million subscribers. (Disney+ has 57.8 million subscribers in the U.S. and Canada, and 127.8 million globally.) Disney is now positioning Hulu as its brand for general entertainment, in contrast to the more family-friendly propertiesDisney, Pixar, Marvel, Star Wars, National Geographicthat fall under the Disney+ banner. That covers originals from Hulu and FX, next-day network shows from ABC and Fox, and licensed content from other networks. [Image: Courtesy of Disney] Still, Disney CEO Bob Iger has been talked up the value of having both services in a single app, and last week the company previewed what that app will look like. In the coming weeks, some Disney+ users will start seeing distinct Disney+, Hulu, and ESPN tabs at the top of the app, along with a “For You” tab with recommendations spanning all three. This helps serve Disney’s goal of getting customers to pay for more than just one of its three services. Wong says customers will see tabs even for the services they’re not paying for, and the app will offer samplings of content from each. “It’s to give people a bit of a taste as to what the breadth of our catalog offers, and encourages you to upsell into a bundle that makes sense for you,” he says. The new tabs aren’t just about upselling, though. Wong says Disney’s also been refining its recommendation algorithms in the For You tab and wants to emphasize them more. This will help Disney make “bolder” recommendations knowing that users can always click into the offerings from each service individually. “Now, if you know you’re in the mood for general entertainment or sports, it’s just one click up, two clicks over to Hulu, or three clicks over to ESPN, and it’s really fast,” he says. What happens to Hulu from here? Regardless of which app people use to access Hulu, Disney is adamant that it’s not going away as a distinct brand. If anything, it’s becoming more prominent. Last week, Disney ditched its Star brand for general entertainment outside of the United States. Its replacement? Hulu. Disney had launched Star as its international entertainment brand in 2021, two years after taking over Star India and Fox’s Asia Pacific operations as part of its 21st Century Fox acquisition. It may be less attached to the brand after selling its majority stake in Star India for less than it expected as part of a plan to merge the business with Reliance-backed Viacom18. The brand shift will require plenty of customer education from Disney. But Wong says this solves the problem of having fragmented marketing in different parts of the world. “It’s going to strengthen and make it easier for us to talk about a unified app experience when we’re not talking about Disney+ and Star in some countries, and Disney+ and Hulu in the U.S,” he says. As for Hulu in the United States, Wong acknowledges that having a single application may be more efficient for Disney in the long run, both from a technical and marketing standpoint. Still, it’s a long way from making that happen. For one thing, Disney acknowledges that its work on tying Hulu and ESPN into the Disney+ app is incomplete. It has not yet demonstrated how it’ll integrate Hulu + Live TV, its $83 per month cable replacement service with features like DVR and a grid-based channel guide, though Wong says all of that will be coming to the Disney+ app eventually. The company also plans to iterate on its initial redesign based early customer feedback. “What you see today is definitely not what all of us will be seeing even three or four months from now,” Wong says. As it builds more features into the Disney+ app and starts nudging people to switch, it will start looking at how much time people spend in the app, how easily they can find what they want, and whether they continue to dip into the stand-alone Hulu app. The goal is for Hulu subscribers to prefer using the Disney+ app, but Wong says data from users will determine when that might happen. “If, ultimately, our products make it hard for someone who just loves Hulu to get to Hulu content, we’ve faled,” he says.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||