By Paul A. Greenberg E-Commerce Times
03/13/01 4:26 PM PT
Absent an established brand name, most
clothing Web sites rely on the instincts of visitors, who arrive at a site
with little or no intention of buying unless their
interest is raised by a particular deal.
By most accounts, last year's holiday season was an
encouraging time for e-tailers, especially those
Web sites that managed to make gift buying hassle-free.
With the exception of online clothing merchants.
For some reason, American consumers still can't see
their way clear to buy clothes on the Internet.
In fact, according to Accenture, 80 percent of online shoppers who
tried to buy clothing at brick-and-click Web sites reported dissatisfaction with the
experience.
Of those who had trouble, 72 percent said they
would not be back. The most common complaint was
that customers were having difficulty finding information about
discounts and return policies.
Frustration with moving around the Web sites also ran
high for clothing shoppers on the Net.
Additionally, almost half of the dissatisfied
customers reported that shopping online for clothes
did not provide any real bargains.
Digital Threads
Clothing companies simply don't get it. It's not
enough to simply transfer an entire product line to the
Internet, toss up some fancy animation and announce the
launch. Customers need some coaxing -- and some
coaching -- in order to buy clothes via the Web.
Recently, Ralph Lauren went online with Polo.com.
Although it's too early to tell how loyal Polo
enthusiasts will be, chances are the site will
be successful. It's easy to navigate, easy on the
eyes, and includes all Polo "classics."
On the Label
The recognition factor may be Ralph Lauren's ticket
to success . Those who wear Polo clothing
generally know what they want to
buy. It's not so much a matter of shopping online
as it is ordering online.
The same might be said for Gap.com, especially since
the site offers users the convenience of returning
merchandise at any one of its many stores across the United States.
Even with those built-in advantages, however, a trip to the
Polo site does not begin to compare with a trip to
the Polo store in Manhattan, where elegantly attired
doormen greet you and expertly trained salespeople
guide you through the experience.
Similarly, a trip to Gap.com can't match the impulse to buy
that kicks in when you see a colorful window display at the mall.
Hard Sell
Moreover, not every online clothing merchant has the advantage
of an established brand name. Most
clothing Web sites need to rely on the basic instinct of
Web visitors, who arrive with little or no intention of buying unless their
interest is raised by a particular deal , such as
a competitive price or a marketing incentive.
These shoppers want to know the returns policy up front. If
there is no easy way out of the purchase, Web shoppers are not
likely to buy. No easy return means no initial deposit, in a manner
of speaking.
With this environment, it's not surprising that sales
gimmicks, marketing hooks and imaginative functionality abound. However,
much of the techno-flash is likely to backfire.
Window Dressing
Landsend.com, for example, allowed me to create a
virtual model,
supposedly of myself. Once I entered
my measurements and body type, an animated figure
appeared on the screen. The technological "mini-me" was
supposed to encourage me to buy some clothes.
Instead, mortified by the image presented, I instantly
clicked away. A virtual dressing room hurt rather than
enhanced my experience of the site.
Even the sunniest projections for online clothing trade
have not predicted a growth spurt in
online clothing sales . Jupiter
Communications projects that by 2003, online apparel
sales will reach about 9 percent of total
clothing sales. That's the same percentage that catalog-based
clothing sales enjoy currently.
The lack of customer fire has industry observers scratching their heads: Why is the public
so reticent to buy digital duds?
Touchy Points
It could have something to do with that doorman at
Polo. We like being pampered during the shopping
experience, whether that means a doorman in Manhattan
or the opportunity to visit the food court of your hometown mall.
Consider Nordstrom.com, a stellar e-tail site. The
site is easy to navigate, offers expertly reproduced
photographs of quality clothing, and includes
prominently placed and easy-to-understand return
policies. So what's the problem?
Those who have shopped Nordstrom's brick-and-mortar
stores know there is no way the experience could be
reproduced online. The business was built on
exceptional, personalized service.
Where else could you try on a pair of Kenneth Cole
shoes, while one salesperson lays out five pairs of
socks for your consideration and another serves you
coffee from a silver coffee service? Try to match
that experience on a computer screen.
Woes or Wooed?
Conventional wisdom suggests that
for e-commerce to infiltrate mainstream America, consumers
need to be convinced to shop online for the necessities.
If America adopts the Web as the place to buy clothes and
groceries, then the online sales channel will succeed.
As one who has bought a fair amount of clothing
online, here are a few areas that might fuel the fire for
Internet apparel sales:
Keep text to a minimum, and emphasize clear,
compelling photographs.
Give the customer a reason to buy online,
such as products and promotional pricing not
available in the associated brick-and-mortar store.
And, most important of all, post return policies on the home page. In fact, if at all possible, overcome consumer worry about exchanging and
returning the clothes bought online. The ease with which new clothes can be
sent back for a different size or color is a lot more important
than a flashy Web site.
Bells and whistles are great, but if they don't
contribute anything to the shopping experience,
don't bother.
What do you think? Let's talk about it.
Note: The opinions expressed by our columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the E-Commerce Times or its management.
As a Retailer travelling down the e-road I found the article pertinent and refreshingly honest.
...
Related Stories
Fashionmall Buys Assets of Three Dot-Coms March 01, 2001
While avoiding takeover,
Fashionmall has been on a buying spree
of its own, picking up Boo.com and Beautyjungle.com.
Low Marks for Apparel E-tailers January 16, 2001
The study advises online retailers to expand pricing and purchasing techniques -- by integrating auction models, for example.
One Year Ago: E-tailers Backpedal on Freebies February 14, 2002
Adding fees and charges to services about which consumers already
feel somewhat ambiguous is not a wise business move.
A Tale of Two Giants: Amazon and Kmart January 24, 2002
Somehow, Kmart forgot the importance of the basics. Amazon never wavered from its
commitment to what consumers want.
And the Winner Is - Online Travel January 22, 2002
Booking travel online gives consumers a greater sense of control - especially compared
to placing their trust in a travel agent or a faceless phone sales rep.