Connect with us

Latest News

There are now 175 online mattress companies—and you can’t tell them apart

Published

on


Samurai Messenger Service prepares to deliver a packaged mattress from the bed delivery company Casper in New York.

Yana Paskova | The Washington Post | Getty Images

Gone are the days of flopping onto mattress after mattress in a stuffy showroom floor.

Online mattress companies that ship to your front door say that finding the perfect bed might just take a few clicks. But experts warn that it’s important to look beneath the sheets. They say many mattresses being sold are actually very similar — despite how they’re marketed.

“The products that you’re buying — there are many similarities and only some minor differences,” said Seth Basham, an analyst at Wedbush Securities who covers the mattress industry. He said that the core of the mattresses at different companies often use the same foam. “The different layers — what goes on top of what, can differ. But the big difference is how they’re being sold and marketed.”

There are now around 175 bed-in-a-box companies in business, estimated Michael Magnuson, founder of mattress review site GoodBed.com. Their sales account for 12% of the $16.5 billion mattress industry, though only the top 10 companies make a significant dent, according to Basham. Among the major players are brands like Purple, Casper, Nectar, Leesa, and Tuft & Needle.

Mattress giants like Tempur Sealy and Serta Simmons should be nervous, said Peter Keith, an analyst at Piper Jaffray. Sales units on average at those companies have been down 5% over the past two years.

A survey by the International Sleep Products Association reported that 45% of mattresses purchased in last year were online, up from 35% for purchases in 2017.

Purple is the only public bed-in-a-box company, after it merged with a public investment shell company in 2018 at a valuation of $1.1 billion. Its stock has dropped 40% since the merger, and the company is currently valued at $355 million. Like many other bed-in-a-box companies, according to Basham, Purple has not yet seen a profit. In 2018, the company made $285 million in sales, and reported a net loss of $19.6 million.

Profit is hard to come by because the ease of forming an online mattress company makes the market competitive, according to Basham. “Barriers to entry are low, but barriers to profitability are high,” he said. “It doesn’t take that much to design a mattress, a marketing campaign, put up a website, and have one of these big companies like Carpenter do the fulfillment for you,” he said, referring to one of the key mattress manufacturing companies.

A rolled up Purple mattress on a doorstep.

Source: Purple Innovations

Manufacturing ease

The majority of bed-in-a-boxes outsource their manufacturing, according to Magnuson from GoodBed.com. “None of these guys, with a few rare exceptions, make their own mattresses,” he said. “They’re literally calling around to producers saying, ‘we need a finished product and here’s what we think it should look like.’ Sometimes, they don’t even know what they want it to look like.”

The companies that make their own mattresses include Brentwood Home, Brooklyn Bedding and Purple, Magnuson said. Many of the bigger bed-in-a-boxes do the research and development of the mattresses themselves, which differentiate how they feel. And companies like Tuft & Needle, Casper and Leesa have layers of foam with proprietary formulas, which means they’re not the same as others.

Most of the outsourcing is to just four major manufacturers, according to Dan Schecter, senior vice president of sales and marketing at Carpenter. He said his company makes mattresses for 40% of the mattress industry at 60 factories throughout the country. That includes including roughly 14 bed-in-a-box brands, along with all the traditional players like Tempur Sealy.

“The customer comes to us … they say they want a mattress that does these things against the body, and they would like to have these features and advantages as part of their marketing story. We then create the mattresses that dovetail with what their vision is,” he said.

Layla CEO Akrum Sheikh said companies that manufacture their own products are “at a disadvantage as they may find themselves being limited to the use of their own technologies and capabilities.”

“In order for Layla customers to truly benefit from the product, we believe in a business model that combines utilizing licensed technology and abilities from multiple manufactures combined with our own proprietary inventions bundled up into one superior product,” Sheikh said. “This model allows us to innovate and create without restrictions.”

Schecter said the mattresses produced by Carpenter do not have the same foam formulations, and that the company only agrees to design and manufacture mattresses that are backed by science.

Purple emphasizes the science behind its mattresses, especially its “Smart Comfort Grid” layer, which it says helps to relieve pressure on your body during sleep. Eight Sleep is another company that’s technology-oriented, and touts its mattresses’ dual temperature control and sleep tracking app.

Innovations like these are helping brands to differentiate themselves, according to Keith.

“For a while there were a lot of similarities, but you’re starting to see the bigger companies diversifying their offerings,” he said. For example, some brands are now selling luxury and cheaper versions, or hybrid models that include both foam and springs.

Marketing confusion

But all the different offerings might just overwhelm consumers, said David Srere, co-CEO of ad agency Siegel+Gale.

“It’s the amount of information. There’s just too much,” he said. “If you go online, not only do all of them look alike, but they’re all talking about their different products. If I tell you that my mattress is special because it’s infused with copper gel, does it mean anything to you?”

Layla, Sleep Science and Propel by Brooklyn Bedding all sell copper-infused mattresses. DreamCloud, Leesa, and Walmart-owned Allswell are just some of the brands offering hybrid mattresses.

Brentwood Home and Sleep Science were not immediately available for comment.

And the sameness between companies applies to their marketing and brand identities, too, according to Armin Vit, co-founder of graphic design firm UnderConsideration. He sees resemblances in the companies’ colors, fonts and advertising messages. “You can see a similar approach,” he said. “In my mind, Casper was the first, so I think they sort of set the tone. They did well, and others followed.”

Casper, which was founded in 2014, was among the first bed-in-a-box company to gain widespread recognition. Their logo, which is navy blue with a sans-serif font, has similarities with Leesa’s, launched in 2015, Nectar’s, which was founded in 2016, and Purple’s, also formed in 2016.

Vit said that the likeness of the logos and marketing might be intentional. “The goal is for something to look familiar,” he said, because there’s a chance consumers will mix up someone’s mattress recommendation with another company’s.

“It’s not ideal, it’s not the most creative or authentic thing to do, but it’s kind of like getting sales and getting customers with confusion in the marketplace.”

Each companies’ messaging isn’t much better. For example, Casper says its memory foam mattresses is for “those who want a ‘just right’ feel whether you sleep on your back, side or stomach,” while the Nectar’s mattress firmness is also “just right” and provides “optimal comfort and support — whether you sleep on your front, back, or side.”

Vit said, “There’s a certain comfort in doing what the successful company’s doing. Someone takes the lead and everyone else says, ‘Hey, that seems good, let’s go there.’ It’s not exciting, but it’s sort of smart.”



Source link

Latest News

Roku could fall another 30% before finding a bottom, chart suggests

Published

on

By


The streaming wars may have claimed a new victim.

Roku shares plummeted nearly 30% last week, its worst weekly performance stretching to its 2017 IPO.

The streaming platform stock was pummeled Friday after Pivotal Research slapped a sell rating and $60 price target on it, fearing a rush of competition in the space. It was crushed days earlier after CNBC owner Comcast announced it would offer a free streaming box to its internet customers.

It could get even worse, according to Craig Johnson, chief market technician at Piper Jaffray.

Roku has “violated the uptrend support line off those April lows of this year. You’ve got some support that comes in at $113. But purely based upon the charts, your best support comes in all the way back down at the 200-day moving average. So you can see the stock trade back down to $81, maybe even $75,” Johnson said Friday on CNBC’s “Trading Nation.”

A move down to $75 marks 30% downside from current levels. It has not traded at that price since May.

“The risk/reward isn’t favorable. Even though the stock is up, it has sold off quite a bit in here recently. I still think you got about 30% downside and maybe a relief rally of 7% upside, so I’d be selling into this move,” said Johnson.

Quint Tatro, founder of Joule Financial, does not see Pivotal’s note on Roku as the stock’s death knell.

“Obviously, the stock got way overheated, trading 25 times sales, but [Pivotal’s] rationale regarding losing market share I don’t agree with. You have to understand, this is a cord-cutting product so their whole rationale is that the cable companies are going to offer their own device for free in order to compete. I’m a Roku user. I own six of them in our home and office. I have not had cable for years so I would not switch to a cable device,” Tatro said on the show.

Tatro says a pullback in Roku’s share price to 14 to 15 times sales, around $100, would make him a buyer. Roku would need to fall 7% from Friday’s close to get to that level.

Disclosure: Comcast is the owner of NBCUniversal, parent company of CNBC and CNBC.com.

Disclaimer



Source link

Continue Reading

Latest News

The market rotation this month may have been driven by a technicality

Published

on

By


A trader works at the New York Stock Exchange in New York.

Wang Ying | Xinhua News Agency | Getty Images

What exactly happened during the “once in a decade” stock market rotation earlier this month that rocked investors? It might’ve just been a one-off technical move and not based on fundamentals.

A huge rotation out of momentum into value names took place suddenly last week. Many read the phenomenon as a warning sign as stocks with superior growth have led the market’s bull run in recent years and said a rebound in interest rates was the catalyst. However, the reversal in momentum, which seemed to abate this week, could be explained by a sudden stop in tax loss harvesting, some on Wall Street said.

The idea is that investors often sell losing stocks to lower their tax bill from the capital increases, a technical move that’s quintessential of a momentum trade — chasing winners and dumping losers. The amount of such activity might have decreased significantly last week due to speculations the Trump administration would pass a bill to reduce capital-gain taxes, therefore reducing the incentive to sell their losers.

“It’s quite possible some of the dominant robo advisors could have assumed that the U.S. administration would indeed follow through with its proposal on Sept. 9, and decided to change their optimization to take this into account,” Barclay’s head of equity derivatives strategy Maneesh Deshpande said in a note on Wednesday.

President Donald Trump earlier this month floated a proposal to tie capital gains taxes to the inflation rate, which could lower the taxes investors pay on profits from selling assets. He eventually ruled out such a plan on Sept. 11. But the discussion around the proposal last week coincided with the change in stock leadership that shocked many investors.

Tax loss harvesters might have stopped selling losers and adding winners on the prospect that capital-gains taxes would go down, which could make tax loss selling less beneficial. Such a change could have caused the downturn in momentum due to less selling of falling stocks and less buying of rising names.

The amount of active tax loss harvesting has ballooned over the years as robo-advisers, which automatically allocate assets in a tax efficient way, gained popularity on Main Street. Robo-advisers now manage about $1 trillion assets, up from $240 billion in 2007, according to Barclays.

“Of course, it is also entirely possible that some other investors would have put on the trade in anticipation of such a proposal,” Deshpande said.

The iShares S&P 500 Value ETF hit its highest level since January 2018 on Sept. 11 as the rotation hit its pinnacle.

Value, cyclical companies with low prices relative to earnings and book values tend to be sensitive to economic growth. However, embracing the group without a material change in the economy doesn’t make a lot of sense, analysts warned.

“Absent an improvement in underlying economics, we believe that the recent shift in leadership is unlikely to persist,” Jonathan Golub, chief U.S. equity strategist at Credit Suisse said in a note Monday.



Source link

Continue Reading

Latest News

‘Game of Thrones’ ends run with best drama award, 59 total Emmy Awards

Published

on

By


D. B. Weiss (C, speaking), David Benioff (3rd L) and cast and crew of ‘Game of Thrones’ accept the Outstanding Drama Series award onstage during the 71st Emmy Awards at Microsoft Theater on September 22, 2019 in Los Angeles, California.

Kevin Winter | Getty Images Entertainment | Getty Images

Despite mixed fan and critic reactions to the final season of “Game of Thrones,” the eight-season epic took home the top prize in the drama category at the Emmy Awards on Sunday.

Closing out the 71st annual television awards ceremony, David Benioff and D.B. Weiss thanked creator George R. R. Martin for entrusting his book series to the young producers more than a decade ago and praised the cast and crew for their work on the program.

Since 2011, HBO’s “Game of Thrones” has garnered 160 Emmy nominations and taken home 59 prizes for everything from acting and editing to special effects and sound mixing.

On Sunday, the program earned two Emmys, one for outstanding supporting actor, which went to Peter Dinklage for his portrayal of Tyrion Lannister, and one for outstanding drama.

Earlier in the month, “Game of Thrones” won 10 additional awards during the Creative Arts Emmy ceremony.

“Game of Thrones” final award tally falls short of the 67 Emmys that “Saturday Night Live” has accrued over its 44 seasons. “SNL” earned two statues on Sunday, one for outstanding variety sketch series and one for outstanding directing.

The final season was widely criticized by fans who felt the pacing and its treatment of previous character developments were not up to par. Still, the show continued to have record-breaking viewership.

Each episode, save for one, topped viewer counts from the season seven finale, which was the series high prior to season eight’s release.

Disclosure: Comcast is the parent company of NBCUniversal and CNBC.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2017 Zox News Theme. Theme by MVP Themes, powered by WordPress.