Comments on: Nau’s Road Comes to an End

By: neilrobertson

neilrobertson — Fri, 09 May 2008 22:29:59 +0000

JohnO: Thanks so much mate! Good luck to you as well!

By: neilrobertson

neilrobertson — Fri, 09 May 2008 22:29:07 +0000

Mike…

Price Point: Yes, I’ve conceded it was high..perhaps too.
Too much wording on the wall: Uh…what? ‘Sustainability’, ‘Beauty’, ‘Performance’ is too wordy?
Flash Site: I loved the look, didn’t like performance of it.
Training: Twice a year is too much? We had to go over the new lines. That’s more than most stores, twice, but that’s why our employees were on top of it!
Advertising: I conceded to that parts of the campaign were probably wrong.
Store Locations: UH…serious? Like Boulder, Portland, Seattle, and Chicago aren’t necessary locations for outdoor apparel of all weather-varieties? As well as a large base of outdoor gear consumers?
Visual Displays: Nau never really had any! Minus mannequins & pictures.
Closing: I didn’t like it either. Fortunately I wasn’t at all affected but others were and it is a tough time…although in all the places we supposedly had bad store locations they still offer a lot of opportunities.

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 09 May 2008 21:38:22 +0000

The reason Nau failed, price points, too much wording on the walls (dumbing down the vision), A website that was all flash, the retraining over and over again of the employees, a horrible pos system, marketing/advertising (close ups of clothing as if they where a recognized brand, how bold) , store locations, and poor visual displays (paper snow? wires, washers and whatever else was laying around the warehouse? Great idea, concept and business model, but giving employees no warning that they are closing, shame on them. Good luck finding a Job in this market, really, I feel for you and all those out of work.

By: JohnO

JohnO — Fri, 09 May 2008 19:28:54 +0000

Best of luck to you! I appreciate your passion and hope you do well in your next gig. Thanks for your comments.

By: JohnO

JohnO — Fri, 09 May 2008 19:28:21 +0000

Best of luck to you! I appreciate your passion and hope you do well on your next gig. Thanks for your comments.

By: neilrobertson

neilrobertson — Wed, 07 May 2008 05:51:30 +0000

Steve: I also think you never really actually knew what Nau was about. First, there was never an article of clothing even near $400. The most was around $300 and they were similarly priced to other high-end jackets from companies such as Arteryx. And again…shipping was an OPTION!!! In fact, that is why we called our store ‘webfronts’! It was so you could in fact ‘connect’ by trying on the clothes, really understanding your size and then order it from the store for a discount OR just take it home. And more than 90% of Nau’s line was under $200…not near the $400 figure. I mentioned before that yes the price-point was high, partly if not mainly due to the selection of materials used…virgin materials are much more cheaper than the alternatives Nau used. Also, the shipping option never took 2-3 weeks, it was processed from the warehouse the same day if possible or no later than the next business day. Plus, there are too many catalog companies that are very successful to say that there isn’t a demand out there for people who are willing to simply order their stuff. In fact, that was a reason for the webfronts…there is a lot of waste in time, money and energy when it comes to mail-order as the return rate is around 40%. The webfront greatly cut that number as the person did get to know their size, color, and such.

And by the way: Nau used ’sustainable’ material options which included natural fibers which are not recycled into clothing. They were virgin in that sense but because they are renewable they are also sustainable. That is one reason why wool is coming back so strong. And the ‘goat’ sweater you are referring to was a cashmere and angora mix. Of which, I would like to say that even though our price point was high…you never could tell me that there was cheaper and higher quality cashmere anywhere else!

By: neilrobertson

neilrobertson — Wed, 07 May 2008 05:37:44 +0000

JohnO: Could I have afforded it had I not worked there? Well, certainly not all the stuff I received from working there! You are right that it was on the high end but it did compete with other high-end alternatives. I would say though that yes I did wish the price point was lower. I also think that when it comes to sustainability clothing too that yes we aren’t there yet when the cost of the materials will be closer to virgin materials. We are getting close though; new recycling programs are out there that are taking in more materials as well as higher volume. Plus, our processes in creating the finished materials Nau for instance used from alternatives is getting more sufficient and the demand is growing meaning they can make more of it and sell more of it rather than requiring only a small group that is wanting a fabric to pay a premium on it knowing that they aren’t going to get rid of all of it. So the time is near when these fabrics I believe will be more common-place.

By: neilrobertson

neilrobertson — Wed, 07 May 2008 05:31:32 +0000

Matt: I don’t think you really knew Nau. Compelling product? It was praised throughout the industry and even recognized for it’s style & sustainability in arenas who’d never even look to outdoor apparel when it came to style. And target customer? It had everything from clean and simple for the Patagonia crowd to sleek and stylish for the urban crowd. In fact, that was an area Nau did excel. It connected with customers (which all you have to do is read the sentiment all over the web now with its closing) of all types…we had loyal customers from a pair of older couples Overland Kansas who were visiting and fell in love, to a couple from Austin who had a second home in town and got all of their friends when they visited into it, and then we had the loyal local crowd who were everything from students to start-up warriors to ad execs…our target was wide. We wanted to connect with people who were looking for style, who were looking for sustainability options, or who were simple looking for high-quality outdoor apparel.

I’d also say that $34 million is quite enough to get a retail operation going…and way too much for simply a catalog. Plus, a catalog would simply go against what we were doing in the sense of sustainability.

And again, sales weren’t the big issue. I wrote before that other companies that had retail stores in store size and/or size of our line would foam at the mouth for how well we did considering we did it in our first year and we did it with an unconventional way of marketing..now could this have been a problem…I would certainly admit that I think it was a flaw.

Also, the shipping option with the 10% discount was an OPTION! An OPTION that we hoped to be used at least 20% of the time but it turned out to be utilized mush more than that! Which saved the company tons in both money and on an environmental level as we NEVER had to use freight shipping which in the retail industry is standard…Nau changed the rules on this!

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 06 May 2008 22:35:13 +0000

One of the very key components that I don’t think the company ever understood is that is an innate ‘connection’ when buying clothes. I want to try it on….look at myself in the mirror….maybe have the store clerk comment on this or my significant other. At any rate, I very rarely buy clothing over the internet….have always been disappointed (wrong color, wrong sizing, wasn’t what the picture looked like, etc, etc.)

Don’t get me wrong, lots and lots of people DO order via the internet and catalogues, hence the success of LL Bean and Land’s End and others. I just don’t think the public was ready to plunk down $400 for a “eco-friendly” sweater made out of recycled goat hair.

Bottom line: They DID NOT understand the fickleness of the end user, their target audience, their customer. If you want me to pay $400 for an article of clothing, I want to walk out of the store with that on my back. I want an ‘emotional’ attachment to that piece of clothing and I want to wear it that day….I don’t want to wait 2-3 weeks for something to come via UPS and only get 10% off the price.

They just didn’t understand their target audience: Sophisticated, urban, hip consumers…..who would pay a lot for those garments but wanted them then and there. This is the instant gratification generation…not the wait 3 weeks generation.

Good luck!!

By: JohnO

JohnO — Tue, 06 May 2008 20:17:13 +0000

Thanks for your follow-up comments.

I don’t want to discount the message Nau tried to bring to the marketplace. It was refreshing and very progressive. I have no doubt that Nau really did “start a lot of conversations and even produce some changes in how people thought, dressed, or companies thought.”

When I say that we’re not there yet, I’m talking about affordability. The concept of sustainable apparel is one that makes complete sense and I think most people would support it…if it’s affordable. In my case, I live in an environmentally enlightened state and was green before Al Gore. I went to the Nau store wanting to buy something, but left with nothing - the prices were too high. It was clear that the Nau’s target consumer was not me…it was me with more money! (Can you honestly say that if you didn’t work there, you could have afforded Nau apparel?)

I think “Later for Nau” summed it up perfectly.