Brands are now combining price hikes with "shrinkflation," a tactic dubbed "maximiniflation." Milka chocolate, for example, raised its price and reduced its bar size, causing a 20% sales drop in Germany. Consumers are now hyper-aware of these dual tactics, making it a critical risk for brand reputation.

Lululemon's founder argues the brand is in a "nosedive" because its finance-focused CEO lacks creative vision. This highlights a critical tension: trendy consumer brands thrive on a founder's unique DNA, which can be lost when replaced by purely data-driven management that prioritizes deals over dreams.

Lululemon disrupted giants like Nike by being fashionable and new. Now, as the third-largest sportswear company, it has become the incumbent. The CEO admits they 'relied too heavily on some of our core franchises,' failing to innovate and losing their edge to newer, more exciting brands.

Samsung's impatient push to release the Galaxy Note 7 before the iPhone 7 resulted in dangerous battery flaws. This "fail fast" approach led to a global recall, tarnished the brand's reputation, and ultimately cost them customers and profits.

While new competitors and shifting fashion trends are challenges, a core issue is Lululemon's strategy. They spend only 5% of revenue on marketing, relying on word-of-mouth. Competitors like On spend 10%, enabling high-profile celebrity deals and partnerships that Lululemon lacks, ceding cultural relevance.

Aggregate profitability can mask serious issues. A company's positive bottom line might be propped up by one highly profitable offer while another "bestseller" is actually losing money on every sale. This requires a granular, per-product profitability analysis to uncover.

For premium retail brands, avoiding the temptation to discount is crucial. Lululemon's strategy to rarely offer sales, even when certain styles fall flat, demonstrates a focus on long-term brand preservation over short-term earnings boosts, a key positive indicator for investors.

The profit multiplier model, which licenses intellectual property, carries a significant risk of brand damage. When licensees release low-quality products, customers blame the original brand owner (e.g., Google for a bad Android phone), not the third-party manufacturer, tarnishing the core reputation.

Chip Wilson's critique of Lululemon provides a playbook for brand decline. It starts when a founder leaves, and a finance-focused board prioritizes quarterly projections. This leads merchants to double down on past winners, killing risk-taking and innovation. Top creative talent leaves, competitors seize the opportunity, and the brand slowly dies while harvesting short-term gains.