For Liz Claiborne, will new name bring better luck?
The fashion house bets on high-end consumers.
The name reflects New York (Fifth Avenue) and Pacific (The Pacific Ocean). A new name is needed because the company is new and needs to create a new brand identity. Fifth and Pacific is not a bad corporate name, but it doesn't obscure the challenges that lie ahead for the fashion house.
Liz Claiborne hasn't had an annual profit since 2006. This year will be no exception. Analysts expect the company to lose 3 cents per share in the current quarter and for revenue to plunge more than 33% to $471.13 million. In response to the changing marketplace, Liz Claiborne is focusing on brands that appeal to wealthy consumers -- think $248 handbags -- such as Juicy Couture, Kate Spade and Lucky Brand. Marketing exclusive brands dovetails nicely with the strategies of high-end department store chains such as Macy's (M).
Post continues below.
In a press release, CEO William L. McComb bragged about the company's "high-growth retail-based brands with significant expansion potential in global markets, spanning multiple product categories. In short, ours is a momentum portfolio, poised for growth and global expansion."
Jonathan Berr is a freelance business writer and does not own shares of the companies listed here.
Liz Claiborne is not the same Liz Claiborne of many years ago---the clothing line was equal to Ralph Lauren----the actual Liz Claiborne sold her business many years ago.
Now the clothing is made for Penney's, and Wal Mart---Junk., and high prices.
It's in all the Factory Outlets---
It seems a good idea, but be cautioned....
As an old marketer of too many years, well, changing a recognized brand name can be a fatal mistake; marketing suicide.
But good luck, regardless.
Fifth & Pacific??? It sounds like an obscure shipping company, not a clothing brand. Where do these people come up with these strange ideas & do they not market-test them first?
There are many issues with this.
For starters, would you associate "Fifth & Pacific" with clothing? I wouldn't. Changing the name needn't be a bad thing but heck, it really should relate to the product.
Secondly, the name should be pronounceable. "Fifth & Pacific" is too much of a tongue-twister to be successful on any level.
And thirdly, as Urbanman said, just how many wealthy people do they think shop at JC Penney??Most people in our area who shop there do so because they are looking for bargains & there is almost always a sale or clearance rack(s) to shop from.
It's still the overpriced chinese sweatshop junk who cares buy a knockoff and save a lot on money.
Well, another name brand goes by the wayside and on to China. Name brands do not mean anything anymore if they are made in China. I know how it feels when you find out that a name you counted on has been sold out. Vera Bradley is another one. When I got my first purse from Vera it was great and the thing I liked about it was they were made here, in the good ole USA. Then I lost my job and and had to give up the expense of her purses. About 2 years ago I started working again and was able to buy some of her items. I bought 2 of them this past fall, only to find out in December that in 2008 (approx) Vera Bradley closed her plants here and took her business to CHINA. Lots and lots of people lost their jobs after working for years at the factories. And the quality has dropped. And you would think if she went to China for the cheaper labor, she could lower her prices a little but oh no, they have instead gone up. The companies that are doing this will sooner or later run into problems because of the quality of the items. Now I am going to look at the list I saw in one of these messages and go to the website to find another company that makes their products here.
Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.
Bill Stiritz owns more than 5% of the company, and has experienced an estimated $145 million in paper losses on his investment.
VIDEO ON MSN MONEY
Top Stocks provides analysis about the most noteworthy stocks in the market each day, combining some of the best content from around the MSN Money site and the rest of the Web.
Contributors include professional investors and journalists affiliated with MSN Money.
Follow us on Twitter @topstocksmsn.