01438 741177         thewinesociety.com

The Society's Community

RIP Majestic


#21

Am I the only one that’s a little bit surprised that they’re rebranding under the Naked Wines name? Purely from a brand awareness and reputation standpoint I’m not sure it’s the right choice. I would have thought Majestic was probably seeing more business than Naked, so maybe they’re looking to re-engage with customers who’ve drifted away from the stores by updating the stores and re-branding. Still, Majestic is quite well established and well-known, and abandoning that seems slightly odd.

I can’t say I’m a regular customer of Majestic, and have bought from Naked twice or maybe 3 times. I’ve had far better experiences with Majestic than with Naked though. I like the tasting tables and have found some wines I’ve enjoyed at prices that I thought were pretty reasonable. Naked on the other hand I’ve generally found to be overpriced, with a daft business model and a boring range of wines…


#22

It does feel a bit back to front…

image


#23

As a shopper they lost my custom years ago for the reason @Aaronb mentioned. When that kind of discounting became illegal in Scotland they sold single bottles there at the same price as the two bottle price in England and Wales.

If there’s one thing I don’t like as a shopper it’s when someone tries to take me for a mug. I’ll take my custom somewhere else thanks.

The one big positive that came out of my disillusionment with the ‘High Street’ and its marketing ploys was that I finally joined TWS in2009 ( and haven’t looked back since ).

That explanatory e-mail really is a thing of wonder it truly reeks of the proverbial.


#24

Majestic has a good range of Kiwi Pinot Noir but apart from that I don’t shop there ( I found their burgundy stock quite limited) Although as previously mentioned it was handy to pick up wine delivered by L&W!


#25

I’m a bit shocked actually. Didn’t expect that withdrawing my custom would have such a rapid and dramatic effect!

Interesting though that what appears to be quite decisive action is covered by a sea of waffle. I wonder what format will eventually emerge. More tastings and more personalised service for instance don’t immediately seem to fit too well with closing shops. Time will tell I suppose.


#26

I have witnessed this strange phenomenon where I work; ‘decisive action’ is always covered by a sea of waffle, as you so accurately put it, with words such as ‘transparency’ and ‘consultation’ used ad nauseum. Sad that it is now happening to Majestic. The fact that so many of us here have reduced our purchases or stopped shopping there altogether is rather telling, though.
For me, TWS model is the real winner.
A wine merchant which is a cooperative?!… It’ll never work! :stuck_out_tongue:


#27

Yes, usually words like “transparency” etc are archetypal examples of doublespeak.


#28

I’m continually amazed at the apparent success of Rowan Gormley’s Naked Wines model.


#29

I think it’s a lot of the latter, and a little bit of the former.


#30

if you own a brand (as an example a new online wine company) and it buys another brand (say an established retailer) it is almost inevitable that your ego…I mean brand… will win in the long term!

I went through this in my last company - a SVP wanted his way with his brand…so the brand I was responsible for (not as sexy but more profitable) was wiped aside…amazing how much the Group had to pay (as @MarkC explained in goodwill/brand writedown) our company for doing so. This tainted the outcome somewhat but the decisions had been made and nobody wanted to admitted they might have rushed into things !


#31

Sounds like a good bit of value destruction for the shareholders there…


#32

suffice to say I disagreed and voted with my resignation !


#33

Anyone remember Pieroth Wines from Luton?

I believe that they were the majority owners of Naked until Majestic took them over in 2015.


#34

I think Pieroth are still going. Indeed a quick web search confirms it. I wasn’t aware of the Naked Wines/Pieroth connection.


#35

I dont think that’s true, it was founded by a former exec of Virgin Wines and a few other people from there who have since left (and seem to be whitewashed from Naked Wine history from a quick Google search!).

I thought I read at the time Majestic bought Naked it was for all intents the other way round, but cant find said article now. Naked seems to be profitable, and we know majestic has long suffered and doesn’t appeal to it’s target audience (i.e. us) from all the comments above.


#36

And still scamming people like the true charlatans they are……. (My personal opinion of course.)


#37

interesting piece fro JR - https://www.ft.com/content/e3e0f2fa-5972-11e4-9546-00144feab7de

wasn’t aware that Pieroth and Halgarten were connected…opposite ends of the spectrum!


#38

I stand corrected, I didn’t know they had sold out to Pieroth. As I mentioned earlier a few other co founders names aren’t in most articles about Naked either.

I believe this is the same article as above, but not behind the FT paywall:

https://www.jancisrobinson.com/articles/naked-revisited


#39

yes, same article - no idea how I got behind the paywall !!


#40

Funny old world, isn’t it? I remember - back in the day - that claiming to be “A Naked Archangel” was the sort of thing that would get you the attention of the local bobby. I blame Jamie Oliver.

But peering through the fog of management-speak, I guess what they are saying is that “Our Majestic brand is tired and failing to deliver the footfall needed. So we’re rebranding with our social-media savvy subsidiary name in the forlorn hope it makes some kind of difference. It will cost ££££, so we’ll need to take the hit. But to keep our investors onboard, we’ll need to spin our tale of woe as an “onwards and upwards” yarn, in the hope nobody notices.”