This paper examines the retail strategy of Urban Outfitters by analyzing four key dimensions of its business model: its counterculture brand identity, the structural barriers preventing big-box stores like Sears and Walmart from replicating its merchandise mix, the role of product exclusivity in driving consumer value, and the concept of shopping as entertainment. The analysis draws on principles of supply and demand, consumer psychology, and retail operations to explain why Urban Outfitters occupies a distinctive niche that mass-market retailers cannot easily enter. Together, these dimensions illustrate how the company deliberately designs every aspect of its retail experience to appeal to individualistic, trend-conscious consumers.
Retailers like Sears or Walmart can never cultivate a trendy, counterculture image because they are the mainstream culture. Counterculture is defined in opposition to companies that operate in the mainstream, and Sears and Walmart are precisely those companies. They are further hampered by the long lead times required to get products to market and by the need for product standardization. Clothes at those stores are mass-produced to ensure uniformity across locations, which by definition makes them more mainstream than clothes produced on a small scale.
In addition, stores like Sears and Walmart aim for an undifferentiated look in their fashions. Their target markets do not desire differentiation; they prefer ordinary, safe styles. For all of these reasons, large retailers cannot attain a counterculture image.
These companies also do not design their own clothing. In order to be genuinely trendy, designs must originate in-house. Sears and Walmart outsource both the design and production functions, meaning their clothes are not produced by specialized creative talent, and the resulting output tends to be based on older fashions. To truly create a trendy, counterculture image, a retailer must employ its own designers — not only to shorten the lead time to market, but also to develop a consistent, cutting-edge signature brand style.
Big-box stores could sell merchandise that approximates Urban Outfitters' offerings, but selling an identical set of products would be extremely difficult. Because their production lead times are longer, the styles they carry would always be knockoffs or approximations — perpetually more out-of-date than what appears on Urban Outfitters' shelves.
Beyond feasibility, big-box stores would not actually want to replicate the variety and constant inventory turnover that characterizes Urban Outfitters. Those stores operate on slim margins, so the rapid price reductions needed to keep inventory moving and the shopping experience fresh would result in many products being sold below cost. There are also significant inventory costs associated with carrying a wider variety of clothing.
Urban Outfitters can manage this challenge because its smaller store formats allow for rapid inventory turnover. Larger stores require far more inventory, making it much harder to maintain the product scarcity that is a defining feature of the Urban Outfitters model. Big-box stores must fill their floor space, so a small but frequently rotating merchandise mix is operationally challenging. Furthermore, small production runs would drive up per-unit costs for big-box retailers. Because they compete for a market unwilling to pay a premium for differentiation, any big-box store charging more than competitors for its clothing would lose market share as a result.
"Scarcity and uniqueness drive consumer purchasing behavior"
"Urban Outfitters targets consumers who shop for enjoyment"
You’re 47% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.