More from these Authors

• Case | HBS Case Collection | July 2020

  Pattern Brands

  Sunil Gupta, Elie Ofek and Julia Kelley

  In March 2020, direct-to-consumer (DTC) company Pattern Brands needed to decide how to allocate resources across its different brands. Pattern Co-Founders Nick Ling and Emmett Shine hoped to avoid the pitfalls faced by some DTC companies—such as inability to scale and lack of competitive differentiation—by relying on their previous experience running a successful branding and marketing agency. Rather than focusing on a single brand, they conceived Pattern as a “DTC 2.0” model—a portfolio of 5 to 10 brands that shared a common theme of activities related to the home and a common mission of helping millennials enjoy daily life. Since its founding in August 2019, Pattern had launched cookware brand Equal Parts and home organization brand Open Spaces. Although Pattern’s team still believed strongly in the benefits of a multi-brand strategy, Open Spaces’ sales and unit economics had significantly outperformed Equal Parts’ to date. Pattern’s leadership wanted to build on Open Spaces’ early momentum with new product colors and product lines, but they debated whether to act on the results of a recent customer survey indicating a positive response to an Equal Parts product redesign. Ling and Shine now had several decisions to consider. How should they allocate resources between repositioning Equal Parts and continuing to grow Open Spaces? How and when should they continue building Pattern’s portfolio by developing a third brand? How much should they invest in marketing parent brand Pattern? More broadly, did Pattern’s model represent the future of DTC brands?

  Keywords: Brands and Branding; Marketing Channels; Marketing Strategy; Product Marketing; Product Launch; Product Positioning; Business Model; Business Startups; Growth and Development Strategy; Demand and Consumers; Business Strategy; Diversification; Competitive Advantage; Consumer Products Industry; Retail Industry; North and Central America; United States; New York (city, NY); New York (state, US);

  Citation:

  Gupta, Sunil, Elie Ofek, and Julia Kelley. "Pattern Brands." Harvard Business School Case 521-009, July 2020.  View Details

  CiteView DetailsEducators

  Related

• Case | HBS Case Collection | August 2018 (Revised July 2020)

  Hubble Contact Lenses: Data Driven Direct-to-Consumer Marketing

  Jill Avery and Ayelet Israeli

  As its Series A extension round approaches, the founders of Hubble, a subscription-based, social-media fueled, direct-to-consumer (DTC) brand of contact lenses, are reflecting on the marketing strategies that have taken them to a valuation of $200 million and debating changes to them that will allow them to grow their business. Ensuring that their marketing dollars were being spent efficiently was critical to the data-driven management team and proving to be complicated as the company moved spending from digital marketing to offline media, which made attribution modeling more difficult. Decisions pertaining to product extensions, channel expansion beyond DTC e-commerce, and geographic expansion were also on the table to prove that Hubble's customer value proposition and operations could profitably scale.

  Keywords: DTC; direct to consumer marketing; health care; e-commerce; mobile; digital marketing; attribution; experimentation; experiments; churn/retention; customer lifetime value; internet marketing; big data; analytics; social media; A/B Testing; CRM; Advertising; Marketing; Marketing Channels; Marketing Strategy; Media; Brands and Branding; Marketing Communications; Online Advertising; Consumer Behavior; Acquisition; Growth and Development Strategy; Customer Focus and Relationships; Health Industry; Consumer Products Industry; United States; North America; Europe;

  Citation:

  Avery, Jill, and Ayelet Israeli. "Hubble Contact Lenses: Data Driven Direct-to-Consumer Marketing." Harvard Business School Case 519-011, August 2018. (Revised July 2020.)  View Details

  CiteView DetailsEducatorsPurchase

  Related

• Teaching Note | HBS Case Collection | May 2020 (Revised July 2020)

  Brand Activism: Nike and Colin Kaepernick

  Jill Avery and Koen Pauwels

  Teaching Note for HBS Case No. 519-046. Nike’s selection of politically polarizing Colin Kaepernick as the spokesperson for the thirtieth anniversary of its iconic “Just Do It” campaign catapulted the brand into the media spotlight and made it a political flashpoint for consumers across America. Would the choice of Kaepernick be positively or negatively perceived? And, would it affect Nike's business results or just generate a lot of social media chatter? As Nike’s management team watched some people burn their sneakers in protest on YouTube and others applaud the company’s behavior on Facebook, they wondered whether inserting Nike into the middle of a heated political debate was the right thing to do or the most reckless action Nike’s brand stewards had ever taken, putting Nike’s $30 billion brand asset at risk? After all, on social media, it was easy to say that one would boycott or buycott a brand due to one’s political beliefs, but in the marketplace, other purchase criteria often reigned supreme.

  Keywords: Marketing; Brands and Branding; Advertising; Advertising Campaigns; Marketing Strategy; Marketing Communications; Corporate Social Responsibility and Impact; Consumer Products Industry; Sports Industry; United States; North America;

  Citation:

  Avery, Jill, and Koen Pauwels. "Brand Activism: Nike and Colin Kaepernick." Harvard Business School Teaching Note 520-104, May 2020. (Revised July 2020.)  View Details

  CiteView DetailsPurchase

  Related