To: Justaham
There's no way they could build a long term business on one single fashion item, regardless of how good it is. The failure to innovate to other products hurt them, although with the economy right now, I don't know that it would have made any difference.
Shoe types are fads, particularly fashion shoes, which was the nature of Crocs. Doc Marten's survives, but it's a very small niche. Dittos for Converse. I know Converse was bought out by Nike, so it's not a stand alone company anymore. Teva has survived as a small brand. The thing is that those companies developed a range of styles. Crocs has only had one successful style in different colors.
10 posted on
07/17/2009 9:24:07 AM PDT by
Richard Kimball
(We're all criminals. They just haven't figured out what some of us have done yet.)
To: Richard Kimball
They actually do have other items then the one style and clothing, too. All ugly.
17 posted on
07/17/2009 9:27:22 AM PDT by
retrokitten
(Jim Thompson's Argentinian Girlfriend)
To: Richard Kimball
Doc Marten’s is a small niche. I wasn’t in a wealthy town, but growing up everyone wanted one since they were a fad at that time. The crocs just don’t fit a niche.
32 posted on
07/17/2009 9:37:54 AM PDT by
rwfromkansas
("Carve your name on hearts, not marble." - C.H. Spurgeon)
To: Richard Kimball
Actually Crocs tried to expand, nobody bought their secondary products.
43 posted on
07/17/2009 9:48:38 AM PDT by
discostu
(Jeff's imagination has gone beyond the fringe of audience comprehension)
To: Richard Kimball
Doc Marten's survives Doc Marten's also diversified. There must be 30 times as many Doc varieties as there were 20 years ago.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson