Skip to main content

Martha Stewart stock due for a rise

As MarketWatch noted Sept. 27, Martha Stewart is back, and she’s better than ever. “‘Brand Martha,’ says the site, is not only untarnished but on a major roll.” How do we know? As MarketWatch notes:
  • Her magazines are “bursting with ad pages”
  • Her “partnerships with major retailers are expanding”—like Macy’s, which is debuting 2,000 products in the first season that her collection is at the stores
  • Former President Bill Clinton appeared as a guest on her daily TV show
  • She signed a deal with 1-800-Flowers.com
  • She opened her first co-branded residential community with KB Home
  • She has agreements with Fine Living TV and the DIY cable network
  • She will soon be selling a line of food at Costco
  • Clarkson Potter/Publishers has announced a new 10 book, five year deal with the company
  • She has also signed a deal with E&J Gallo Winery to sell “Martha Stewart Vintage” wine (Wikipedia)

The financials are fantastic, notes MarketWatch:

  • Revenue at Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia was up 7% in the last quarter
  • Ad revenue at Martha Stewart Living was up more than 20% to $89.8 million January through June
  • Revenue for the Martha Stewart wedding publication was up 16% vs. an industry average of 6%

Yet the stock price is flat – shares are currently at about $13.20 (October 8) vs. a 52-week high of $23.21 last December.

Bear Stearns, says the site, issued a fairly positive report on Martha Stewart, noting that “business trends are solid” and “the balance sheet is strong” and that the Macy’s launch could boost the brand even further.

On top of that, the Today show recently held “A Martha Stewart Wedding,” choosing a couple to bestow a Martha-Stewart style wedding ceremony upon. Great publicity.

The only thing that bothers me, to be honest, is the product: I don’t love it. But enough people love the image and the ideas that I think her brand is solid and here to stay.

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between brand equity and brand parity?

Brand equity is a financial calculation. It is the difference between a commodity product or service and a branded one. For example if you sell a plain orange for $.50 but a Sunkist orange for $.75 and the Sunkist orange has brand equity you can calculate it at $.25 per orange.

Brand parity exists when two different brands have a relatively equal value. The reason we call it "parity" is that the basis of their value may be different. For example, one brand may be seen as higher in quality, while the other is perceived as fashionable.

________________
All opinions my own. Originally posted to Quora. Public domain photo by hbieser via Pixabay.

What is the difference between "brand positioning," "brand mantra," and "brand tagline?"

Brand positioning statement: This is a 1–2 sentence description of what makes the brand different from its competitors (or different in its space), and compelling. Typically the positioning combines elements of the conceptual (e.g., “innovative design,” something that would be in your imagination) with the literal and physical (e.g., “the outside of the car is made of the thinnest, strongest metal on earth”). The audience for this statement is internal. It’s intended to get everybody on the same page before going out with any communication products.Brand mantra: This is a very short phrase that is used predominantly by people inside the organization, but also by those outside it, in order to understand the “essence” or the “soul” of the brand and to sell it to employees. An example would be Google’s “Don’t be evil.” You wouldn’t really see it in an ad, but you might see it mentioned or discussed in an article about the company intended to represent it to investors, influencers, etc.Br…

Nitro Cold Brew and the Oncoming Crash of Starbucks

A long time ago (January 7, 2008), the Wall Street Journal ran an article about McDonald's competing against Starbucks.
At the time the issue was that the former planned to pit its own deluxe coffees head to head with the latter.
At the time I wrote that while Starbucks could be confident in its brand-loyal consumers, the company, my personal favorite brand of all time,  "...needs to see this as a major warning signal. As I have said before, it is time to reinvent the brand — now.  "Starbucks should consider killing its own brand and resurrecting it as something even better — the ultimate, uncopyable 'third space' that is suited for the way we live now.  "There is no growth left for Starbucks as it stands anymore — it has saturated the market. It is time to do something daring, different, and better — astounding and delighting the millions (billions?) of dedicated Starbucks fans out there who are rooting for the brand to survive and succeed." Today as …