Everyone talks about the 'retail apocalypse' as if it's a format problem. Stores are closing! Malls are dead! The future is online! But walk down any interesting street in any interesting neighborhood and you'll see stores thriving. Not just surviving, thriving. The problem was never 'stores.' The problem is that most retail brands built their entire value proposition on convenience, and Amazon beat them at convenience.
Everyone talks about the 'retail apocalypse' as if it's a format problem.
The stores that are dying are the ones that exist to distribute commodity products with no brand distinction. If your store is just a place where I can touch the same things I could buy online for less, you're a showroom, not a destination. Why would I drive there?
The stores that are thriving offer something you literally cannot get online: curation, expertise, experience, community. Powell's can't be replicated digitally because the experience of being lost in that building IS the product. A great record store isn't about buying vinyl. It's about the conversation with the person behind the counter who knows more than any algorithm.
What kills me about the 'retail apocalypse' narrative is how it absolves brands of responsibility. They weren't killed by Amazon. They were killed by their own failure to build brands that gave people a reason to show up. Blaming the internet is easier than admitting you never gave anyone a reason to come in.
Build something worth the trip. That's not a retail strategy. That's brand strategy. If you can't articulate why someone should physically come to you instead of ordering from their couch, the format isn't your problem. You are.
Truffles is asleep on my keyboard as I write this, which feels like editorial commentary.