Blaze Columbia sent me a link to this story on SL Reuters about a recent marketing survey on women’s fashions in Second Life by Market Truths. There’s only 105 participants in the panel, so the results (in my opinion) deserve to be taken with a grain (or maybe a shaker) of salt. The survey implies that top women’s fashion designers could potentially raise their prices.
Eighty-five percent of the respondents spent more than L$250 a month on clothing, with 24 percent spending more than L$1,000 and 25 percent spending more than L$2,000. The group expected prices of L$100 for skirts, pants and tops, and L$150 for jackets.
Since the Linden dollar has really risen in value since last summer (when it was as cheap as L$330/US$1 — click through to read about the economics) I’m not so sure I’d be eager for a round of price increases. Most designers, in my experience, anyway, are tortured by setting prices — they don’t want it to be too high it won’t sell and they want to make something back for the hours of toil that went into aligning 30,000 seams correctly and painstakingly adding highlighting where it belongs. A fine line, at a minimum.
There’s more data points in the article as well: unmet clothing desires, and what designers are top brands among the panelists. Quick read, worth the click through.
With a panel of 150 I guess it’s not surprising that none of them had heard of First Impressions. I guess I still count as a new designer, but i still felt a pang at
“women’s business suits were a category that respondents would like to buy but that is currently unavailable”
Oh well, becoming known takes time. Guess I should learn some patience!
ermm 105. Silly fingers
Re Pukk’s comment about the panel’s quote that women’s business suits are “currently unavailable”, I have absolutely zero interest in buying a suit myself, and yet am aware of numerous designers making them, some quite stunningly I might add. And um, how about Second Style #2’s feature on office wear? How did this group miss seeing any of the options out there?
Interesting story, though.
105 out of how many regular residents? 200000 at least? And how many of those aerious major mojo fashionistas.
The must not read the blogs, coz I’ve seen suits and business appropriate separates on the blogs. They also must not use SLB or SLEX. Sure suits are harder to find and not as common but you can find them. I found them, and I’m way younger than 170 days, oh wait, counts months. never mind. (six months, tomorrow) but I did find some within the first week or so…checking…I joined on July 19 and had a suit on July 24th!
Finding the right price is difficult, raising prices??? Why? The rate has strengthened. Maybe its time for some prices to go down a bit. Maybe I’m wrong.
lol.. recently made a separate folder in my inventory just for business suits… found so many of them all over SL. They make great day wear. Puk.. if you don’t see me over at your place in the next couple of days… IM me to remind me I should!
[...] Celeb posted a link to an interesting article on Second Style today that showed up on the Reuters SL website featuring a “study” of 105 panel members that says that women’s fashion designers should…note: should, not could…raise their prices. But umm…I’m not really understanding what from that survey gave that impression. If only 25% are spending over 2000L a MONTH on clothes…well, hell I’d be a rich woman if I only spent 2000L a month on clothes lmao. I’m prolly closer to 2K per week, and that’s on my 500L premium stipend (lordy, I miss the long defunct weekly ratings bonuses when I was raking in over 2K per week! But that’s another story), my DJ tips, and the occasional purchase of $L when I panic LOL [...]
I’m actually really annoyed by this survey and the fact that it made reuters….maybe I’m missing something but I dug around their website and I can’t find the ACTUAL survey results or very much about the methodology of the survey. Were they asked to pick off of a list, or submit their own info? Where were the participants even found? Seems like it was just a regurgitated press release. And I don’t want to hurt people’s feelings so I won’ name names but there was at least a store in that list of most recognizable names that I NEVER heard. Those that know me know I’m a pretty hard core shopper at this point so for me to not have heard of a store is well…unheard of. Without going off on a whole thing that could make for its own editorial, I’d like to just point out that SL has a very complex social system and it would be very difficult and one would have to be very careful about who they survey since communities in SL are very insular and there is a whole new set of standards for analyzing how one would define group types. Unlike RL, it’s not about class, race, education. It’s about social groups and style.
Hi Everyone,
It’s my company that did the research described in the Reuters story, so I just wanted to clarify a few things mentioned in previous posts (and that may have been misunderstood based on the story).
First of all, the full report (35 pages, 3 figures, 16 graphs) will be available late Saturday or early Sunday SL time in our office in Sylvina (http://slurl.com/secondlife/sylvina/235/123/22). That describes the methodology, but one thing that was originally incorrect in the article is that the 105 people surveyed represent only a subset of our research panel. While research is a challenge in SL and no one can be completely sure of a representative sample because no population statistics are available, we have been careful to use a number of different methods to recruit panel members to make sure we’ve reached into different communities within SL.
The report is based both on survey data and observational data collected within SL stores. We don’t actually say prices should be raised, but rather that store owners should consider adjusting their prices in light of the results (because we realize that many factors feed into pricing decisions). What our results show is that prior positive experiences with a store or designer have a big influence on what customers are willing to pay, yet currently there is no price premium for stores that have greater awareness once you control for what is being offered (in terms of the number of pieces in a particular item, use of flexiprims, permissions, etc.). So actually what we suggest is that stores that are more popular (have lots of customers with positive prior experiences) consider raising their prices, and less popular stores consider lowering theirs to account for that difference in customer willingness to pay.
The report also quantifies how, on average and holding everything else constant, things like those affect the prices being charged in stores around SL and compares how things like permissions and flexiprims influence what stores are charging versus how they influence what customers are willing to pay.
Beyond pricing and business suits, there is a lot of other information in the report such as segmentation of the market based on SL and RL style (not age, class, etc.) and how things like clothing preferences, willingness to pay, RL and SL clothing expenditure, store awareness, sources of information, etc. differ by segment. For example, there is one segment that is heavily influenced by fashion blogs and publications.
There is also a full list of things respondents say they want but have not been able to find within SL. As mentioned in the article, business suits were mentioned more frequently than anything else, but there are also many more specific suggestions.
I hope that clears things up a bit and hope many of you will take the opportunity to read the full report once it’s available. We hope to begin offering these regularly, so I’m also happy to listen to any suggestions that you have about other information you would like to see included in future reports, or anything else that would make them more useful to you.
Mary Ellen (SL: Pebbles Hannya)
I feel a little responsible since i pointed out the article to Celebrity.
I just got an IM from Pebbles about how the report was available for purchase. I did not purchase the report yet–not sure if i will. But she is charging 5000 for it, or 4000 lindens if you join the panel.
Maybe I’m wrong, maybe Pebbles can clarify this, but paying participants to complete the study and giving designers a discount if they join the survey panel, even letting them on the survey panel, seems contradictory toward a random/scientific sample. Like I said, maybe I’m wrong. But I wanted to at least point that out before someone spends their lindens on it.
well hmmm for one thing yeah lol for another we have many suits for women at my work and also have these people tapped into the fact that as Grazia once blogged …women look awesome in mens suits , I have had many ladies of business in SL come to House of Zen in the past 6months and had them walk out with suits from both sides of our range mens and ladies, I personaly wear the mens suits and dress slacks at least every other day many of the people in SL that know me will say that is so , also a panel shouldnt be paid for sharing info etc that as was said seems jaded to me, and maybe if a real survey wanted to be conducted why not get those machines some stores use for hiring or their own surveys that you input questions into and people click and answer in chat on a different channel, im sure there are many stores or sims that wouldnt mind one being set up if it was in fact going to achieve a beneficial outcome to all (just my opninion ) but again these people surveyed as stated havent researched at all enough to make such broad statements about what is and what isnt available in SL because every day my mind is blown by a new product somewhere and NO ONE has even come close to realy tapping into everything sl has to offer commercialy there is soooo much , thank god
)
xoxo Sasy xoxox
oh and p.s lmao at the lindens spent most of us tip that much a day nevermind spend it on clothes, yes many have budgets etc but im yet to see any one ‘go shopping’ in sl and spend 100L and stop
Hi,
Just a follow up to the past few comments…
We do research on a whole range of topics within SL — not just clothing (for example, the next report we have coming out is on the real estate and buildings market), so the more people (with all types of interests) we get to join our panel, the better chance we have of being able to draw representative samples for each topic (for example, there’s no reason to believe a clothes designer would have any kind of bias in terms of their opinions about real estate or buildings — many of them are customers for those things just like many of the rest of us). Offering discounts on all reports (on every topic) for panel members is one way to do that. We’re also trying to get people on our panel who have some commitment to SL as opposed to just wanting to do surveys to get Lindens without regard to the accuracy of the information they provide or how the information will be used. We want to attract people who see it as being in their interest to provide valid and reliable information because they want to improve aspects of SL that they care about.
That does mean that we will end up attracting people with vested interests on particular topics, but if necessary we can screen them out of particular projects where this is likely to influence results. In many cases however, that’s not even necessary as those with vested interests tend to cancel each other out and/or be present in such small numbers that they can’t influence results overall.
Having said all of that, getting people to participate in any type of research (in RL or SL) is a challenge because you can’t force people to participate. We therefore do offer L$ to people who participate as a token of our appreciation for them taking the time to do so. Offering incentives is common in RL too because without them it’s even harder to get representative samples (you basically end up with people who have a strong vested interest, people who are really angry for some reason, or people who have a lot of time on their hands).
Research in SL comes with all of the challenges of RL research plus a few others, but we really believe that both buyers and sellers will be better off if more information is available, and that’s what we’re trying to provide. Will the information be perfect? No. People can’t be forced to participate nor can they be forced to tell the truth, so nothing can give you 100% accuracy 100% of the time, and all forms of research have limitations. For example, picking up on some of the points mentioned, if you conduct a survey in a single store, you have no idea what people who don’t shop in that store think about anything. And at least some of the single store surveys I’ve seen in SL also offer incentives, such as free clothes from that store, which means that people who like the clothes at that particular store are much more likely to participate than people who don’t like the clothes at that store (there are also privacy issues to be dealt with when surveying via chat channels), so you never really find out what it is that the people who don’t like the clothes there object to
In spite of the challenges, the current report does provide valuable information about supply and demand in the market as it stands today. And as I said before, we’re open to suggestions about what types of information business owners would like to be able to get in the future.
Lastly, the things people say they have been unable to find in SL are not necessarily not available at all (though in the case of business suits, they do represent a smaller proportion of available items than of total expenditure). It’s just what the respondents say they personally would like and have been unable to find. Readers of this blog are themselves unlikely to be representative of all women’s clothes shoppers in SL because, by definition, they are very interested in fashion. It’s not surprising that they would spend more, be aware of where to find more things, etc. All of which goes to show that even on this first time out, we probably were successful in getting a reasonably representative sample of SL women’s clothes shoppers
Mary Ellen / Pebbles
What I don’t understand is the why. Market research compiles the average opinion of a group of people who are willing to fill out surveys for L$. The individual opinion is therefore lost. How is this sort of thing bennifical?
Take forinstance what focus testing does to film. I only use this as a basis because I know a good deal about the subject. The trick of it is making something that keeps the audience suspending disbelief, connect with the characters and understand what is going on. When appealing to the average person, what was once extremly interesting can become boring. Take for instance the difference between the original Blade Runner and the directors cut. One has voice over explaining the ideas of the film to you and the other does not.
There is a line between catoring to the average consumer and creating something from your imagination. Believe it or not you can tell when someone is working from passion or from what they think will sell. Not by the types of items created but by a certain undefinable thing.
There is a reason why niche markets work oh so well. Especially when it comes to creative objects. Some people like stripper clothes, others like the current styles in RL, punk, vintage, gowns, ect. One style isn’t more important then the other, what is important is the variety and differences so the consumers can find things that work for them.
On the debate of the most known designers, we all have to remember that there are LOTS of different factors that play into it. For those younger avies, it is generally the Linden picked ones for RL articles whether you think they deserve it or not. Especially since we know how much the lindens have a pulse on the community. *laugh*
I beg of designers to take these sorts of thing with a grain of salt. Create what your passion and imagination takes you. It’ll feel a lot less like work and you’ll have hapy repeat customers.
I personally track most or all of the data included in this report based on actual sales at my shop. I tally and configure a spreadsheet at the first of every month and think I have a pretty good handle on it. If other merchants don’t do this sort of thing already, I strongly advise it.
It *would* be interesting to see if the respondents agree on things like desired colors, but it’s not worth the L$5000 for the report, given the comparatively tiny sample. At least not to me. If someone else is not already tracking their own sales and market data, maybe they could benefit more.
And like Luth said, it’s better to make what YOU want, rather than what a report says. But my data tells you to be sure to always make a copy in black.
I agree with Luth’s point that it often doesn’t make sense to try to please the “average” consumer because individual differences are lost in averages. But any respectable research should go beyond the average to show the extent to which responses vary from the average and why. For example, our report identifies differences based on market segment (defined based on RL and SL style), what types of clothing people buy (by style and function), where they get their information, length of time in SL, etc. It also identifies how the prices charged by stores vary from an overall average price based on things like the number of pieces included, whether prims or flexiprim pieces are included, permissions, type of clothing, etc.
As for the broader question of “why” that observation about averages really answers it. Sure, some people are just interested in making what they like no matter what anyone else thinks, but other people may be trying to make things that appeal to a particular group of people or appeal to as many people as possible. Some of those people may welcome the opportunity to get additional input (beyond what they are able to get through any formal or informal data they collect on their own) about what it is that people do want, whether people are indeed finding the things that are already available that are consistent with their own preferences, and what factors influence the prices being charged by others offering comparable items. People have different preferences about the amount and type of information they want just as they have different preferences about the amount and type of clothes they want. So the same logic applies, why expect everyone to be the same?
I applaud the effort but i wished the the report were pulled down to a more comfortable price. As Starley mentioned, we pay attention to our own transaction stats which is already a minute sample of respondents. Market research is a huge endeavor in a MMO especially when its meant to be prescriptive. Would it be great if anyone on their team explain the stats & methods in a meet?
I’d welcome the opportunity to meet with anyone who is interested to discuss the methods used and also the tradeoffs between sample size, sample quality, data timeliness, report frequency, and price, and how we might be able to work something out that meets your needs and is economically viable for us. We also have some ideas about how we might be able to add value to the transaction data you’re already collecting which I can also run by anyone who is interested.
As far as the price goes, as you’ve said market research in this environment is a huge endeavor. For example, the focus in this discussion has been on the survey data, but the report also includes observational data on 1146 items comprising 2988 individual pieces of clothing. Collecting that much data takes a lot of time, and operating our panel requires considerable resources too, so we need to be able to recover some of that investment. Also, information dates quickly, so our plan all along has been to drop the price of reports once the information does start to become dated. So the information will be available at a lower price later, but it will be much more valuable to those who make use of it sooner rather than later and that’s reflected in the pricing. If there is sufficient demand, we also plan to offer reports on a subscription basis, so that would also bring the price down for those who commit to a subscription for a specific number of reports.
Anyone who does want to meet to discuss these issues is welcome to e-mail or IM me, and I can set up a mutually convenience time for those who are interested to get together.
Eh I dunno. I guess you know what you are doing but this all seems a bit skewed to me.
1146 items comprising 2988 individual pieces of clothing? Sorry but that’s nothing. I have more than that in my Bare Rose folder alone. Yes BR could raise their prices and still have a lot of business. But that would go against the grain of the BR philosophy which is high-quality inexpensive items. (disclosure: I work for BR and have for a long time).
Stores that aren’t doing well should lower their prices seems like a no-brainer to me. I do business management in SL and have told some of my clients that — and I didn’t need market research to figure it out. Conversely, yes some stores with a regular clientele could raise their prices — but they risk loosing their loyal regular clientele. Case in point: I no longer shop regularly at Pixel Dolls. Sorry Neph, I love your shop and your clothes and when you put stuffs on sale I rush over and buy everything — but shopping there regularly is just too expensive for me now. Similarly, Nonna, arguably the most expensive shop in SL, is a once in a while trip for me. I daresay that, despite very loyal followings and some of the highest quality designs and textures in SL, both designers risk loosing business by raising their prices.
I think a blanket statement such as you’ve made doesn’t take market research to figure out and cannot be applied across the board. I think you do designers and businesses in a grave disservice by touting this ‘market research’ you’ve done without, apparently, understanding the market and what drives costs and shopping in SL.
The blanket statements you’ve described have been made by people making assumptions about what’s in the report without having actually read it. As stated previously, what we said was that designers and stores should consider their pricing policies in light of the results, which is different than saying they should change them because, as indicated previously, we realize that many other factors go into pricing decisions. What we actually found is that once you control for what is in an item (number of pieces, style, function, prims, permissions, etc.) there is no overall difference in the prices being charged by more and less well known stores in spite of the fact that a large proportion of customers are willing to pay more to buy something from a store or designer they’ve had positive prior experience with than a store or designer that is unknown to them. And while that may indeed be a no brainer, it’s not reflected in differential pricing in stores. So if you have given advice to less well known stores or designers to lower their prices then it has not been followed (at least in a general sense — there obviously may be specific exceptions).
As for the number of items in your inventory, I’m not exactly sure how it’s relevant unless you’ve used some systematic process for selecting it and then done statistical analysis to see the composition of what’s available in SL based on style, function, color, price, prims, permissions, etc. If you have done that, I’m sure many people would be interested in seeing what you found. That’s what we’ve done and it does show what drives the prices being charged across the board in SL and not just by a single store (since obviously those who set prices for a single store know what they based their own prices on). It also describes how those same things influence customer willingness to pay. Everyone can comment on their own perceptions of what they personally are and are not willing to pay for, and perhaps individual stores have done the analysis required to figure that out for their own customers, but I also have not seen any other attempt to look at that across SL. Once again, if you have that information, I’m sure others would be interested in seeing it.
All these are good things sound like good things (without y’know seeing the data). But its not what the Reuter’s article said and I daresay most people won’t look any deeper than that. And while I realize you aren’t responsible for what Reuters reports, I wonder that you aren’t concerned that the article misrepresents what you are doing and your findings.
I’m sure Reuters didn’t deliberately misrepresent the contents of our report, but I am concerned about people getting the wrong idea from the Reuters article. I did ask for a correction on the information about the panel (which originally made it sound like 105 was the number of people on our entire research panel — not just the sample used for this particular survey). I would have been much happier if the rest of the article discussed the fact that now there is at least some information available (which, in spite of the limitations that I’ve already acknowledged seems like an improvement over the previous situation), gave more of an overview of the full range of topics covered in the report, and put issues such as pricing and store awareness in their broader context as they are in the report itself instead of making it seem like that’s what the whole thing was about and that the recommendations made are more definitive than they actually are. As you say though, that’s not within my control. In retrospect, I suppose it’s hard to get the sort of qualifications and nuances that are in the report itself into a short article.
I’m not sure it will ever be possible to completely avoid that kind of thing since it isn’t fully within our control, but I definitely intend to do my best to ensure that any future articles, etc. about this or subsequent reports do provide a more complete picture and don’t use individual pieces of data out of context and/or in a way that makes it likely that they’ll be misinterpreted.
I don’t feel that a survey of such a tiny group of people and the naming of a few shops, among many successful design houses, (I could name you at least 25 successful SL businesses off the top of my head), would tell me anything that my sales, genuine traffic and customers who IM to ask or tell me themselves.
While I appreciate that Mary Ellen wishes people to read the article to be fully informed, we must also remember that there is a price for this article which makes it seem less of survey and more of a money making activity to me. Where money exchanges hands I would also have to question the impartiality of those involved so for me this seems like a waste of time and I certainly wouldn’t pay to read it.
Just my two pennies!
This survey has proven at least one thing: There is hardly anyone who is prepared to pay L$ 5000 for it.
And so we are all forced to guess at the contents.
[...] happens when you add market research to the current designers. Back in Jan, Second Style posted a story about a market research firm selling a survey of 105 residents’ opinion on women’s [...]