Sunday, May 20, 2018

10 Boneheaded Blunders That Cost Companies Millions

Copyright 2018 by Gary L. Pullman

We all err from time to time. However, few of us make multi-million-dollar mistakes or are in the position to do so. Judging by the errors of those who have made such mistakes, that's a good thing. Whether their misguided actions are caused by dubious attempts to make their brand stand out among competitors' products, by careless proofreading, by faulty testing, by bad judgment, or by other errors, companies often pay a high price, both in loss of revenue and in the erosion of customer relations, when such mistakes occur, as these 10 boneheaded blunders that cost companies millions demonstrate.

10 Abercrombie & Fitch's “Exclusionary” Marketing

 Abercrombie & Fitch's CEO Michael Jeffries

In a cruel and misguided attempt to make his company's brand stand out, Abercrombie & Fitch's CEO Michael Jeffries insisted that the company refuse to “target” potential customers who are “young, old, fat,” or “skinny.” Abercrombie & Fitch garments weren't for everybody, he maintained; they were reserved for only the “cool and popular kids” who deserved them. Most “people don't belong, and they can't belong” in his company's clothes, he told an interviewer. “Are we exclusionary?” he asked himself, before answering, “Absolutely.” What Jeffries saw as “exclusionary,” others viewed as disdain for ordinary people who could have been customers. As a result of these and other of Jeffries' derogatory statements, Abercrombie & Fitch, once a popular line of clothing, has become unfashionable, its sales plummeting sharply. His comments damaged his company's brand and caused it millions of dollars in lost sales. (LINK 1)

9 Alitalia Airlines' Cut-Rate Deal


A mistake in pricing cost Alitalia Airlines $7.72 million dollars in lost revenue. The Italian airline offered “a business-class flight from Toronto to Cypress” for only $39. The deal was a “steal.” Unfortunately for Alitalia, the victim of the theft was the airline itself. The ticket price was actually supposed to be $3,900. Before the mistake was caught, 2,000 tickets were sold at the $39 price. Although the airline tried to “cancel the purchases,” it finally accepted the loss and made good on the cut-rate price. (LINK 2)

8 Coca-Cola's Product Replacement


To remedy a downturn in its market share during the 1970s and 1980s, Coca-Cola decided to introduce “New Coke,” a sweeter alternative to its regular product. Taste tests suggested the idea was both timely and wise. Half of the 200,000 subjects who participated in the company's “blind taste tests” preferred the taste of “New Coke” to both the original version and to Coca-Cola's chief rival, Pepsi. It was out with the old and in with the new, as “New Coke” replaced old Coke. However, Coca-Cola customers rebelled, many of them boycotting the new beverage. Analysts suggest the company believed people made their decisions as to which soft drink to buy solely on the basis of taste, not realizing that many had an “emotional involvement” with the original beverage. Neither of these possibilities were covered in the company's research. Although Coca-Cola lost millions of dollars due to this testing error, they rectified their mistake by reintroducing the original, now calling it “Classic Coke.” (LINK 3)

7 Decca Records' Decision Not to Represent The Beatles



A Decca Records executive had bad news for agent Brian Epstein. “Not to mince words,” he was told, “but we don't like your boys' sound. Groups are out; four-piece groups with guitars particularly are finished . . . The Beatles have no future in show business.” Such decisions are judgment calls, but this one, in retrospect, was more than just bad; it was totally wrong. Decca had the same opinion of The Beatles as it had of such other auditioning groups as The Yardbirds and Manfred Mann: the company simply saw no future for them. The Beatles earned billions of dollars, a good portion of which would have been Decca's, had the company's executive not rejected the Fab Four as clients. (LINK 4)

6 JC Penney CEO's Attempt to Reinvent the Company

Ron Johnson, JC Penney's former CEO, made several mistakes that proved nearly fatal to the department store chain's bottom line. First, he took it upon himself “to dictate consumer shopping habits” by discontinuing its “deep discounts” in favor of “everyday low-pricing.” As a result, the company's loss was “$1 billion for the year,” which was “the worst quarter in retail history.” (LINK 5)


Second, Johnson sought to install boutiques selling “designer brands” in the department stores. He hoped to snag Martha Stewart's products, which are popular with customers, but Macy's had already signed a contract with Martha Stewart Living and sued Penney, thwarting the hoped-for arrangement. The boutiques did not do well, either. (LINK 6)

Third, it may not have helped customer relations for Johnson to have hired Ellen Degeneres as the company's spokesperson. Some of the stores' female customers, the controversial One Million Moms included, didn't believe she represented their values as family-oriented, heterosexual women. (DeGeneres is a self-identified lesbian.) Johnson's response was to double down by airing a Father's Day TV commercial featuring “two dads,” which may have further eroded the company's image and its profits. (LINK 7)

5 Lululemon's Barely-There Yoga Pants



Lululemon, “a popular retailer of yoga, running and cycling gear,” created a problem for itself by selling yoga pants that “were so sheer they inadvertently became see-through when wearers struck certain yoga poses.” As a result, the company had to recall “about 17 percent of its inventory after customers complained,” a “gaffe [which] cost the company tens of millions of dollars.” Company founder Chip Wilson aggravated the situation by, in effect, blaming the victims. The problem, he suggested, wasn't his company's clothing, but the “women's too-curvy bodies.” (LINK 8)

4 Metamorfyx's “Terrible Agreement”


On behalf of their clients, Robert Granadino and Hernan Camacho, inventors of a computer keyboard designed to “reduce users' chances of acquiring Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and other muscle strain afflictions,” their former lawyers agreed to a settlement with Microsoft. The problem, their current attorney claimed, was the lawyer never adequately informed them, and “it was a terrible agreement.” The attorney for the lawyers who'd previously represented the inventors countered by arguing Granadino and Hernan Camacho had agreed to the settlement because Granadino knew “full well” litigation “could result in the determination of the invalidity of the patents.” Because of the agreement with Microsoft, Granadino and Camacho's company, Metamorfyx, which holds their patents for the keyboard, lost $30 million, their lawyer said. (LINK 9)

3 Microsoft's Noncompliance with a European Union Regulation


Microsoft was fined $732 million for its failure to comply with a European Union requirement that its operating system display a “browser ballot” that allowed users to access “downloaded links to rivals' browsers, including Google’s Chrome, Mozilla’s Firefox and Opera’s namesake, for a period of five years.” In 2015, after year-long litigation, Microsoft was able to reduce the damages to $49.8 million. The company is required to “set aside $42.5 million to fund an antitrust compliance office for the next five years.” The remaining $7.3 million will be to pay “the plaintiff's lawyers.” (LINK 10)

2 Netflix's Split Services


It seemed to make sense to Netflix to increase its fee “for customers who subscribed to both DVD and streaming.” After all, the company only wanted to raise the fee from $9.99 to $15.98. Those who subscribed only to the streaming service or exclusively to the DVD service would be billed $7.99. The strategy was to encourage more customers to select “the streaming-only plan,” which is more cost-effective for Netflix, since streaming doesn't require “expenses incurred in shipping and processing rentals and returns.” The fee increase wasn't seen as reasonable by many of the company's customers, however. In fact, they were incensed. Netflix, having anticipated an additional 400,000 customers, might lose 600,000, analysts predicted. As a result of their blunder, the company “lowered its [2011] third-quarter subscriber outlook by 1 million,” which represented a loss of nearly $10 million. In the end, Netflix rescinded its intended fee increase, but the damage was already done, and the company sustained considerable loss of revenue and bad customer relations. (LINK 11)

1 Nintendo's Big Mouth


The value of Nintendo's stock fell by $6.7 billion dollars in 48 hours after “the company reminded new investors that it had no role” in developing the 2016 runaway bestselling Pokemon Go game. “Opportunistic investors” sold their shares as soon as the word was out, and Nintendo itself provided the information. “The Pokémon Company—not Nintendo—was responsible for funding, licensing, and greenlighting Pokémon Go, entitling it to the bulk of profits.” (LINK 12)




No comments:

Post a Comment