Retail & Merchandising

AI pricing is broken, and everyone knows it. Orb just analyzed 66 AI companies and found something interesting: 𝟗𝟐% 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐲 𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐝 𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐥𝐞-𝐦𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐥 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐧𝐠. Quietly, completely, across the board. Why? Because usage is unpredictable, infra costs are high, and old SaaS pricing just doesn’t cut it anymore. We’re not pricing features anymore. We’re pricing intelligence. Some insights from the report: ◾𝐇𝐲𝐛𝐫𝐢𝐝 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐫𝐝 – 92% blend subscription, usage, freemium, and tiers in one structure ◾𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐨𝐧 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐛𝐨? Subscription + usage + freemium + tiered plans ◾𝐏𝐞𝐫-𝐬𝐞𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐚𝐝, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐢𝐭’𝐬 𝐧𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐚𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐞 – 85% of companies using SaaS pricing now pair it with usage-based pricing ◾𝟏𝟐% 𝐫𝐮𝐧 𝐦𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐥 – often segmenting between business and individual users … This shift is more than cosmetic. It reflects a deeper reality: AI products don’t fit cleanly into legacy monetization models. They need pricing systems that scale with usage, support experimentation, and reflect actual value delivered. If you’re building in AI, your pricing strategy isn’t just a detail, it’s a growth lever. 📊Full report https://lnkd.in/g-R3_cwU It’ll reshape how you think about monetizing AI.

A very easy way to improve your Amazon ads efficiency by at least 10% Let’s say you’re spending ₹4–5 lakhs/month on Amazon ads. Your ACoS looks okay. Conversion rate seems fine. But your gut tells you—you’re still wasting some money on irrelevant traffic You’re not wrong At Atomberg, we had found that some of our Amazon spend was going toward search terms that had no business seeing our ads: - “cheap fan” -“rechargeable fan” - “usb fan under 1000” None of these users were in-market for a ₹3,000+ BLDC ceiling fan. But we were still showing up. And paying for those clicks. And it’s not just us. I’ve seen 6–7 brands' Amazon ad accounts across categories over the last few years—same problem, every single time The fix? N-gram analysis Takes less than an hour. You don’t need to be a performance marketing expert. But the results compound What’s N-gram analysis? It’s breaking down every search term into its word components—1-grams, 2-grams, 3-grams—and then identifying patterns that consistently drive waste… or conversion. Example: “cheap rechargeable fan for hostel room” turns into: 1-grams: cheap, rechargeable, fan, hostel, room 2-grams: rechargeable fan, hostel room 3-grams: fan for hostel, etc. When you do this across all your search terms, you start seeing the real picture. Why this matters more than just checking your search term report: Search terms ≠ keywords a) One keyword can trigger 100s of different queries. Some convert. Most don’t. You need to find the patterns. b) Waste is diluted across low-volume terms. Maybe “rechargeable fan for hostel” spent ₹300. You ignore it. But what if 12 other queries with “rechargeable” spent ₹6,000 in total with zero conversions? c) Long-tail is infinite. N-grams are finite. You can’t negate every bad search. But you can block the core terms—“cheap”, “usb”, “mini”—once and be done with it. d) It helps you scale campaigns too. You can find goldmine phrases like “white ceiling fan”, “silent BLDC fan”, “fan for living room”—with 5x+ ROAS. Those became exact match campaigns What you should do: a) Pull last 3 months of search term data b) Break them into unigrams, bigrams, trigrams c) Create a pivot with spend, orders, ROAS by N-gram d) Negate high-spend, low-conversion N-grams (e.g., “cheap”, “rechargeable”) e) Boost high-ROAS ones (e.g., “bldc”, “ceiling fan white”) f) Add exact match campaigns g) Rinse and repeat monthly Try it. Guaranteed to improve efficiency at whatever scale you are operating If you want to read an expanded version of the post, link is in the first comment

Brad Pitt’s new F1 film is a masterclass in how brands can show up in culture. A $300 million budget. Real F1 tracks. And luxury brands fighting to sponsor a team that doesn’t even exist. It’s entertainment, sport and marketing all blending together... and it’s re-writing the playbook for how brands embed themselves into culture. Here’s what makes it stand out: • A fictional F1 team, APXGP, filmed during real Grand Prix weekends. • Brad Pitt, trained in a modified F2 car, driving alongside actual F1 drivers. • Lewis Hamilton co-producing to capture the authentic essence of the racing world. • Real brands like Mercedes-Benz AG, SharkNinja, IWC Schaffhausen and Tommy Hilfiger actively sponsoring a fictional team. • Actual drivers, including Max Verstappen and Carlos Sainz, making cameo appearances. • All set for release in cinemas June 2025, followed by streaming on Apple TV+. This isn’t just clever product placement, it’s narrative integration at its best. Real brands woven into a fictional story, filmed in real-time at actual events. And it’s a glimpse of where brand marketing is heading. The film isn’t even out yet, and here we are talking about the brands already. That’s how you build long-term equity. This is the new standard in marketing: • Culture first, commerce second. • Stories over traditional advertising. • Integration, not interruption. If your brand isn’t part of the stories people care about, good luck buying their attention. Learn from this. Build worlds people want to be part of. Create stories they’d miss if they disappeared. And find ways to turn up in that culture and be part of the narrative. Rather than looking for ways to interrupt them.

For the past two years, CPG brands have been coasting on price hikes to keep revenue numbers up. And now? That strategy is running out of steam. I spend a lot of time talking to CPG leaders, and here’s what I’m hearing as we head into 2025: consumer confidence is weak, volume growth still hasn’t bounced back, and brands can’t rely on price increases anymore. The question I keep getting is—what now? - Global CPG sales grew 7.5% in 2024, but that’s down from 9.3% in 2023 and 9.8% in 2022. - 75% of growth came from price increases—not volume. Better than the 90% in 2023, but still not healthy. - Developed markets are slowing fast. U.S. & EU growth dropped to 4.5% in 2024, and volumes stayed flat. - Emerging markets are driving almost all global volume growth. They saw an 11% sales increase in 2024—twice the growth rate of developed markets. (Bain & Company) For the first time in years, raw material costs aren’t the #1 worry. Instead, every executive I talk to is worried about: 1. More competition for shoppers – Too many brands, not enough differentiation. 2. Consumers spending less – 80% of U.S. & EU shoppers are actively cutting back. 3. Retailers pushing back harder – The pricing power shift is real, and brands are feeling it. And if you look at where consumers are actually spending, the trend is obvious: ✅ Premium brands and private labels are thriving. ❌ Mass-market and mid-tier brands are getting squeezed. ✅ Shoppers want ‘value’—but that doesn’t just mean ‘cheaper.’ It means better quality, stronger differentiation, and clear benefits. So, Where Do CPG Brands Go From Here? - Volume needs to make a comeback. Price hikes won’t cut it anymore—brands have to focus on innovation, relevance, and real consumer connection. - Emerging markets can’t be an afterthought. If you’re only focused on U.S. and Europe, you’re missing the biggest growth engine. - Retailer relationships will define 2025 winners and losers. Brands that offer real category value (beyond price negotiations) will have the advantage. - If you’re stuck in the middle, you’re in trouble. Premium and private label are thriving—where does your brand fit? I’ve had so many conversations lately with CPG leaders trying to figure out their next move. If 2024 was the year of price hikes, 2025 is the year to rethink strategy. What are you seeing in the market? What’s the biggest challenge (or opportunity) for CPG this year? Let’s talk. 👇 #CPG #IndustryTrends #ConsumerGoods #RetailStrategy #FMCG #Executives

🚨Amazon has built a really cool new ad tech to monetise Prime videos, but it’s not what you would have thought! 🚨 To appreciate this new ad tech we need to go back in time and look at some history. We would have all watched on movies and tv shows where products have been strategically placed to drive brand awareness and recall. The hit show Stranger Things had about a 140 brands featured in the 4th season with some estimates sizing it to $27million in brand placement value. And this is just one season of one show. As more and more people are disengaging with intercepting ads, brands and media producers are trying innovative ways to gets brands in front of eyeballs without being skipped. Now if a studio had to integrate with brands, it requires for them to coordinate before hand with the brands and figure out where to strategically place the products and shoot the content. Enter Amazon’s Virtual Product Placement Technology. Virtual product placement is an emerging technology that inserts a digitally rendered product, billboard, or logo into a movie or TV series after it has been filmed. Amazon collaborates closely with content creators when determining placement locations and available product categories for each participating title. All decisions are made in line with the artistic vision for each movie or series, with a shared goal that placements will not interfere with the story or affect the viewer’s enjoyment. Brands are expected to spend upwards of $125bn by 2026 on video ads, so it’s a pretty huge market they are going after. Stats also show that 63% of viewers say they feel the urge to buy a product when they see it featured in a TV show with GenZ leading the pack. In a specific case study, Bubly a sparkling water brand saw a 18.1% lift in aided recall, 6.8% lift in brand favourability, 16.5% lift in purchase. This ad format becomes even more powerful when you combine it with Amazons e-commerce marketplace where marketeers can do full funnel advertisements all the way from awareness to purchase. Secondly, with post production virtual product placement, the same product placement could be bid by different brands for e.g the scene having bubly could very well also have any other canned drink which ever fit into the category. I must say this is by far one of the most impressive ad tech I have come across in recent times and Amazon is truly Priming us to purchase.

With most Q2 results in, we’re getting a picture of retail performance. 🔄 A bit like in Uno, the reverse card is being played. Some retailers that have been performing badly are starting to see declines bottom out or are moving into modest growth (think Best Buy, Target, Foot Locker, Peloton, Victoria’s Secret, Gap). 📉 In contrast, some of the traditional star performers are struggling to keep up the fast pace and are seeing a slowdown (think Lululemon, Ulta, Dollar General). 💰 Are economic dynamics playing a role here? Partly. But strategy and competitive forces remain critical. Ulta has more competition, so too does Lululemon which failed to inspire with its womenswear in Q2. Target has recently invested a lot in price and value. Foot Locker, Victoria’s Secret and Gap all have turnaround programs. 🤔 On this front, don’t always buy the narratives retailers spin. Dollar General blames its weaker numbers on pressures on its customers. There is truth in this, but it has been true for a long time. The issue now is that inflation is not flattering the growth as much and there is more price competition in grocery. Oh, and some stores are terrible and are preventing sales and repeat visits.  🖼️ The long-term picture remains vital because quarterly results fluctuate and create noise. An example is Nordstrom, which has 3.4% growth this quarter, versus Dillard’s which has a 4.9% decline. Look at the Q2 numbers compared to 2019, and Dillard’s has grown sales by 4.4% while Nordstrom’s sales have grown by just 0.2%. A long term view is sometimes a better signal of the health of the business model. 🏡 Home related categories remain very pressured. A lot of this is linked to the more sluggish housing market: moving is an important driver of demand. Some bigger ticket purchases are financed, so high interest rates play a role too. ↔️ The market remains polarized with a balance of winners and losers. Out of the selection in the graph below, 17 retailers are in growth and 18 are in decline. 🐌 Growth rates have, generally, deteriorated since Q1. From the retailers shown below, 21 have lower growth rates than in Q1, 14 have higher growth rates. The average, overall growth rate has dropped by a modest 0.5 percentage points since Q1. So no recession, but some modest slowdown. #retail #retailnews #earnings #consumer #economy #shopping

Indian D2C has a fraud problem no one is talking about.. Everyone knows about returns. Fashion: ~30% return rate. Electronics/Health: ~20%. BPC: ~10% But, industry data shows: ~15% of returns are fraudulent. For a brand with 30% returns, that means 4-5% of total orders are fraud. It could be a return that comes back with the product used, damaged or even missing from the box. The worst thing I ever saw was my capsules replaced by gems and sent back 😂 The difference? Returns cost you just shipping with a product that can be reused. Frauds cost you the entire product + shipping + processing. The 3 Types of Return Fraud: 1. Wardrobing Order for wedding/event → Wear once, keep tags on → Return claiming "didn't fit" Fashion brands report: 15-20% of returns are worn items 2. Bracketing Order 4 sizes of same item → Try at home → Keep 1, return 3 Problem: Each return costs ₹100-150 in logistics. Customer pays nothing. 3. The Swap/Scam Order new laptop/phone → Return old/broken one in new box → Claim "defective" Electronics brands lose lakhs annually to serial number swaps alone. Let’s talk numbers: For a ₹10 Cr revenue fashion brand: Return rate: 30% = ₹3 Cr in returns Fraud rate: 20% of returns = ₹60 L fraudulent Cost per fraudulent return: - Forward shipping: ₹40 - Return shipping: ₹60 - Processing: ₹50 - Product: ₹1,000 (can't resell worn/damaged items) = Total loss: ₹1,150 Annual fraud loss: 6.9% of revenue. That's more than most D2C net margins. One of the reasons it's exploding is because of many people putting this as “Instagram hacks” or "Order outfits for events, return after". But, also because our ecommerce customers have not matured. Making return fraud = "smart shopping." While "7-day no questions asked return" is marketing advantage for brands, it’s getting fatal with these smart hacks. The sad part is that there's no good solution. - Industry-wide blacklist? Won't happen (anti-competitive) - Stricter policies or charge for returns? Lose to competition but the most likely to actually happen. - Better detection? Expensive, always lagging - Accept the loss? Kills margins Until fraud is culturally stigmatized again, D2C economics will stay broken. Are you guilt of doing this?

We're moving away from charging for *access* to software and toward charging for the *work delivered* by software & AI agents. Don't freak out: this doesn't mean everything will become *pay-as-you-go* overnight. I can think of 7 flavors of charging for work: 1️⃣ Pay-as-you-go - No commitment, totally flexible - Enterprise procurement teams usually *hate* this! - Works best when your customers can bill-back the expense or bake it into an operating budget - Otherwise, there's a risk of customers policing their own usage (taximeter effect) 2️⃣ Subscription + pay-as-you-go - Small level of commitment helps 'lock customers in' and give them access to advanced features, support, etc. - Works well when the usage metric is getting commoditized (ex: SMS messages, compute, storage) -- you can advertise a low usage fee & make up for it with the subscription fee - Still not quite loved by enterprise procurement since their bill isn't predictable yet now includes multiple line items... 3️⃣ Three-part tariff (usage subscription + PAYG) - Similar to the above, but with a larger subscription fee that includes some level of usage "included" - Folks usually advertise the initial usage as a gift ("get your first 500 SMS messages for free!") - Including a minimum level of usage helps get the customer hooked & usually incentivizes more overall consumption 4️⃣ Usage-based subscription (high watermark) - Customers commit to a certain level of usage or tier (ex: up to 5,000 API calls per month); this is typically "use it or lose it" - Subscriptions are for a high watermark of usage -- if usage exceeds the plan in a given month, they immediate move into upgrade territory - Fear of overages + usage fluctuations encourages sales to over-sell & customers to over-buy 5️⃣ Usage-based subscription (annual drawdown) - Similar to the above, but the usage allocation can be consumed flexibly over the course of 12 months similar to a gift card - This gives the customer plenty of time to monitor adoption & plan for an early renewal/upgrade if usage is trending above their commit - Great for customers with seasonality or month-to-month usage fluctuations who still want a predictable bill 6️⃣ Roll-overs - If the customer doesn't consume their full allocation, they can "roll it over" to the next year -- typically only if they commit to a flat or increased renewal - More customer friendly, but also more painful to manage! 7️⃣ Adaptive flat rate - The customer commits to a usage-based subscription, but can use the product as much as they want with no overages/upgrades during that period - Their tier resets up/down at renewal based on their actual usage behavior - Much more predictable for customers while encouraging them to increase consumption (downside is that you could be stuck with the costs!) -- I suspect most folks will offer multiple options as they seek to balance lands, expands & tough procurement convos. The downside: complexity.

Is THIS the best ad campaign ever? In 2015, Sport England challenged ad agency FCB Global to close the 2 million strong gender gap by getting women more active. The agency used the insight that women often feel 'fear of judgement' in exercise, to create the campaign 'This Girl Can'. The campaign is a rallying cry to women to get active in THEIR own way by replacing fear with a 'don't give a damn' attitude. This is shown with bold copywriting, relatable casting, REAL moments (the make-up smudged under the eyes, normal jiggling bodies, menopausal sweat, period cramps, tampon string hanging out your pants) and a true sense of female camaraderie. Since it's launch: - 3 million women were inspired to exercise as a direct result of seeing the campaign - 1000+ social media mentions each day - 37m views across social media - 500,000 active members in the This Girl Can community - Cannes Lions award The campaign is evidence that advertising can make great impact and drive change in many little corners of the world. THIS is the result of a clear brief, unifying insight and - in this case - a dedicated female creative team who truly 'understand' their audience. But more than that, it's the result of a LONG-TERM campaign that has been running for almost decade, and continues to re-engage the audience in various different ways, globally. I think there is such a short-term mindset in advertising nowadays. Mainly due to the fast-paced nature of social media, the need to 'go viral' and the economic need for performance marketing tactics to generate cashflow. But without the longer-term brand campaigns, we are missing the ability to build strong narratives and make REAL change in the world. And with that, stronger brand salience, brand love and LEGACY. This is an element of advertising that I fell in love with years ago. And an element that I see really defining which brands stand the test of time, an which fall apart years down the line.

The same people hunting for discounts on Myntra are paying ₹1,500 for instant fashion on Zepto. This isn't just another retail trend. It's a complete reversal of how we understand fashion buying. Urban consumers have started treating fashion like groceries, demanding immediate delivery for immediate needs. Think about it. That Saturday evening party outfit can't wait three days.  The campus event tomorrow needs the perfect look today. Quick commerce understood this shift before traditional retail even noticed and quick commerce platforms are specifically targeting trend-conscious urban customers and Gen Z. Why? Because they're willing to pay ₹500 to ₹1,500 on Zepto or ₹1,400 to ₹1,600 on NEWME for 25 to 60 minute delivery. The implications for fashion brands are staggering. Expanding inventory to new regions now requires: → Tech-led demand prediction systems → Understanding hyperlocal preferences → Building distributed warehouses → Tracking regional buying patterns Brands studying fashion demand must consider completely new factors. Weekend travel creates spikes in metro cities. Festive seasons hit differently across regions. Occasion-based purchases drive impulse buying. Each locality has its own style DNA. Traditional retail spent decades perfecting central warehouses and seasonal collections. Quick commerce demands the opposite. Small inventory points everywhere. Weekly design drops. Regional customization. Fashion has entered the 10-minute economy, and there's no going back. What's one fashion emergency that made you wish for instant delivery?