Lululemon“透视裤”惹火烧身

    最近的新闻报道很抓眼球：高速成长的运动服饰公司露露柠檬（Lululemon）正在召回一款过于透明的薄裤。这家公司恐怕绝对不希望靠这样的负面新闻增加曝光量。

    尽管这些报道带着调侃的一位，但这起事件的影响可能要超过露露柠檬过去遇到过的所有麻烦。简单举一些例子：2007年，一些独立评测机构表示，无法验证露露柠檬的VitaSea系列产品是否像其声称的那样包含从海藻中提取的有益“海洋氨基酸”。公司CEO克里斯汀•戴伊在2012年第二季度的业绩电话会议上承认，由于有些颜色（包括一款非常鲜亮的“法国粉”）渗色，公司不得不撤回产品。

    露露柠檬拒绝对这篇文章发表评论，但很好地处理了裤子过于透明的问题。它在公司网站上发布了详尽的常见问题及解答，在3月21日的业绩电话会议上戴伊也花了很多时间来讨论裤子问题。

    因此，这不是什么沟通问题，投资者们担心问题可能比这更严重。“最近受到质疑的包括公司的执行、新店铺的生产率以及管理层对投资者的答复是否有点敷衍了事，”3月19日Cowen and Company的一位分析师报告指出。“我们付出了相当的代价，终于意识到，涉及染色和织造等各种问题的严重性远超想象。”

    报告称，露露柠檬管理层借助客户反馈才发现了问题，这种情况本不应发生。事实上，露露柠檬应当对供应链的每一环节都进行严密的品质控制，特别是就该公司而言，供应链的紧张程度对于公司能否保持惊人的增长至关重要。

    截至2012年底，露露柠檬的股价在三年内涨幅超过3了倍。根据《财富》杂志（Fortune ）和其他媒体的报道，这家公司的成功秘诀是总能推出轰动一时的热门新产品，全价出售，快速周转库存。这是打造需求的聪明做法。

    但现在，这家公司正在面临真正的需求问题。露露柠檬正在撤回由Luon布料制成的问题裤子，它占到露露柠檬下装库存的17%。这对于这家公司而言可是一大笔钱。

    “我们目前预计第一季度损失销售额1,200万至1,700万美元，今年余下时间将再损失4,500万至5,000万美元，主要发生在第二季度，”戴伊在3月21日的公司业绩电话会议表示。

    如果供应不足，露露柠檬还能满足市场的需求吗？与此同时，它还需要重建口口相传的口碑。迄今为止，口碑一直是它成功的关键。

    The headlines are almost too easy -- fast-growing sportswear company Lululemon is recalling pants that, it turns out, are see-through. This is the worst kind of exposure the company could ask for.

    Beyond the headline humor, this particular hitch may have more legs than previous setbacks at Lululemon (LULU). Some quick examples: In 2007, independent testers couldn't verify that the company's VitaSea line contained, as Lululemon claimed, beneficial "marine amino acids" from seaweed. More recently, CEO Christine Day admitted during an earnings call for the second quarter of 2012 that the company had to pull products because certain colors, including a retina-searing "Paris Pink," had been bleeding.

    Lululemon, which declined to comment for this article, has handled its bottomless pants problem well. The company posted a comprehensive FAQ on its website, and Day spent much of the company's March 21 earnings call addressing the pants problem.

    So no, it's not a communications issue, but investors are worried it might be something worse than that. "Questions had arisen recently about the company's execution, productivity of new stores and whether management's responses to investors have had a bit too many excuses rather than answers," says a March 19 Cowen and Company analyst report. "We have now learned the hard way that various questions regarding dying and fabrication were more, well, material, than we had thought."

    The problem, the report continues, came to Lululemon's management via customer feedback, which should never happen. Instead, the company should keep a close watch on quality control at every stage in its supply chain, especially since the tightness of the company's supply chain has been critical to its impressive growth.

    As of the end of 2012, Lululemon share prices had more than quintupled over the previous three years. The secret to its success -- which Fortune and others have reported, is to generate buzz around new, hot products, charging full price for them, and cycling quickly through fresh inventory. It's a smart way to build demand.

    But now, the company is facing a real demand issue. Lululemon is pulling all of its defective pants made with a fabric called "Luon," which accounts for 17% of Lululemons inventory in bottoms. That's big money for the company.

    "We're currently estimating lost revenue of $12 million to $17 million in the first quarter and additional lost revenue of $45 million to $50 million for the balance of the year, primarily in the second quarter," said Day, during the company's March 21 earnings call.

    Can Lululemon meet demand with a legitimate supply shortage? At the same time, the company will need to re-gain control of the word-of-mouth buzz that has been, up until this point, essential to its success.