VF Corp – Consumer Shift to Lifestyle Brands – 30 June

2021

Disclaimer

The information, material and content contained in this transcript (“Content”) is for information purposes only and

does not constitute advice of any type or a trade recommendation and should not form the basis of any investment

decision. This transcript has been edited by Third Bridge and may differ from the audio recording of the Interview.

Third Bridge Group Limited and its affiliates (together “Third Bridge”) make no representation and accept no liability

for the Content or for any errors, omissions or inaccuracies in respect of it. The views of the specialist expressed in the

Content are those of the specialist and they are not endorsed by, nor do they represent the opinion of, Third Bridge.

Third Bridge reserves all copyright, intellectual and other property rights in the Content. Any modification,

reformatting, copying, displaying, distributing, transmitting, publishing, licensing, creating derivative works from,

transferring or selling any Content is strictly prohibited.

Specialist:

Title:

Alexandra van der Stap (AvdS)

Former Chief Strategy Officer & Global Head, Strategy & Go-to-market, The North Face at VF

Corp

Moderator: Nyree Hinton (NH), Third Bridge Sector Analyst

Agenda:

1. Portfolio update across Vans (NYSE: VFC), The North Face, Timberland and Dickies

2. Outdoor, Active and Work category consumer trends

3. E-commerce penetration and D2C approach

4. Whole distribution strategy and retailer dynamics

5. Market share and profitability outlook

Contents

Q: Could you give an overview of the outdoor and action sports industry? Where do lifestyle brands fit in?

What are some industry drivers and who are the top competitors?

Q: You said the lines between sports and lifestyle are blurring. How is this trend developing globally,

especially in the markets that The North Face or VF Corp as a whole play in? Do you think this trend will

develop in other regions?

Q: Could you outline VF Corp and the main brands driving growth for the company? What are some of the

brands’ strengths and weaknesses?

3

3

4

Q: How might The North Face’s consumer engagement and distribution strategies differ from other brands

in the portfolio? Have you noticed differences in The North Face’s D2C growth rates vs Timberland or Vans?

How successful do you think VF’s December 2020 acquisition of Supreme

5

Q: How would you assess VF’s dependence on wholesale, so whether the main brands are heavily wholesale

across channels? How does that compare to companies that want to pivot away from wholesale entirely or

keep that portion very small vs other distribution channels?

5

Q: Do you think Timberland is still reliant on wholesale in the Americas due to the weight of the heavy boots

6

or is the target consumer demographic more likely to go in store than utilise online channels?

Q: How has The North Face maintained brand affinity over the years and reinvented itself? It’s an older

brand, but it can connect with younger consumers, which many brands don’t know how to do. What were the

strategic decisions around reinventing the brand to connect and keep up with the mature younger

consumer?

6

Q: You mentioned The North Face reinventing its brand by collaborating with Supreme. I assume this

happened pre-merger, but do you think The North Face can manage Supreme as a brand, rather than just

collaborate with it to improve brand scarcity? Supreme knows how to increase brand awareness and it’s very

sought after, but if it’s under new management, it could be easy to dilute what’s been paid for. What do you

think is The North Face’s ability to keep Supreme Supreme while improving it, rather than just scaling it and

7

perhaps diluting some of the brand equity the company had hoped to purchase?

Q: Supreme focuses on the streetwear market and you mentioned one of The North Face’s segments is

lifestyle. Does it make strategic sense for The North Face to have a line just for streetwear, given its

seemingly complementary collaborations with Supreme? Why not have two brands going after the same

market but in different categories, given that Supreme talked about a USD 50bn market opportunity within

streetwear

Q: VF plays in many different channels – D2C stores, D2C digital, a large wholesale presence and a decent

international wholesale presence and many different brands in many regions. Do you think the company is

spread too thin? Are there some markets where the volume is not worth the added cost and resource drain,

and that could be better used if VF were to strategically focus on just three regions and three distribution

channels and really scale those markets, rather than playing in every market it can find?

Q: Could you discuss VF’s missed opportunities or weaknesses around appealing to more women across its

brands and categories? What’s the dynamic of the demographic the company offers products to? Is there an

opportunity it could focus on more?

Q: Is VF Corp progressing quickly with making The North Face less dependent on seasonal revenues by

targeting the athleisure or activewear category? Is the company innovating in athletic leisure? Is there a

blurred line between wearing a workout shirt to work out and wearing one to hang out? How successfully

have The North Face or any other VF brands penetrated this category?

8

8

9

9

VF Corp – Consumer Shift to Lifestyle Brands

Transcription begins at 00:00:02 of the recorded material

NH: Welcome to Third Bridge Forum’s Interview entitled VF Corp – Consumer Shift to Lifestyle Brands. I am

Nyree Hinton and I will be facilitating today’s Interview with Alexandra van der Stap, former Chief Strategy

Officer and Global Head of Strategy and Go-to-market for The North Face at VF Corp.

Alexandra, before we start today’s Interview, please state I agree or I disagree to the following statement: You

understand the definition of material non-public information and agree not to disclose any such information,

or any other information which is confidential, during this Interview.

AvdS: I agree.

NH: Could you give an introduction to your background and the roles you’ve held in the industry?

AvdS: I spent about six years at VF Corporation, first starting in the EMEA organisation and later in the

global organisation for The North Face, working on strategy, business operations and go-to-market. Also

working within VF strategy leadership group, so my expertise comes from a North Face lens, but I do have a

view on VF and the other main brands there as well.

[00:01:21]

Q: Could you give an overview of the outdoor and action sports industry? Where do lifestyle brands fit in?

What are some industry drivers and who are the top competitors?

AvdS: If you look at these segments, you can see that outdoor is definitely shifting a bit away from core

outdoor and top-of-the-mountain activities towards more lifestyle focus, also driven by big brands, and

clearly, brands active in this space are (audio cuts out 02.03) by VF, Patagonia and Columbia, who are the

main global brands here, then supported by more specialised brands such as an Arc’teryx or a Mammut or a

Jack Wolfskin in EMEA. Key trends there are consumers moving towards more versatility and (audio cuts out

02.34) boundaries between different activities, so where we previously had really strong division into

categories from mountaineering and climbing and hiking, and all these things, and running, you start to see

these boundaries blurring a bit, different types of consumer groups now moving outside, which has been

accelerated by COVID, as many other ways of exercise and entertainment were closed for (audio cuts out

03.11) a bit of a surge in outdoor activities after the first lockdown in Q2 last year.

In action sports, where VF is active with the Vans brand, the market is a bit more fragmented, with quite a lot

of small brands competing for space. VF is active there. Obviously, also Boardriders, a company specifically

focusing on board and other sports, is active, and a variety of other areas, and obviously related into more the

Nike and the Adidas and the other apparel giants in active categories. The boundaries here between sports and

lifestyle are blurring rapidly, with all brands projecting lifestyle (audio distorts 04.16), if you’d like to dive into

something further than this.

[00:04:25]

Q: You said the lines between sports and lifestyle are blurring. How is this trend developing globally,

especially in the markets that The North Face or VF Corp as a whole play in? Do you think this trend will

Private and confidential 3

develop in other regions?

AvdS: Yes, this is definitely happening around the world. I think it’s driven by the brands realising that it’s

(audio distorts 05.02) in an outdoor segment where obviously VF is (audio cuts out 05.05) Timberland, that

market, as such, it’s growing a little bit but not spectacularly, whereas there’s a big opportunity to move into a

lifestyle category, and following the examples of big sporting goods brands such as Nike and (audio cuts out

05.24) definitely extrapolated their brands there. The growth rates are a little bit different, and also the

essence of the market as well. In the US, (audio cuts out 05.44) is more on mountain lifestyle casual wear

that’s driving this. If you look into Europe, that’s happening as well, but you also see a focus on city wear with

more premium lifestyle gear and positioning that the outdoor brands are moving into.

If you look into Asia, then a lot of growth in the outdoor market was actually not really done in outdoor as such

in terms of the sports activities, but it was more driven by (audio cuts out 06.20) in Asia and the aspirational

pull that outdoor brands have. Slowly, consumers are starting to move outside more in China, for example, as

well, and you see a little bit of a reverse trend actually, that the outdoor brands that were positioned in the

cities now start to actually become real outdoor brands, and consumers are increasing their participation in

outdoor activities. (Audio cuts out 06.55) all around the globe, but in general, pre-COVID, we could see that

the majority of growth for outdoor brands did not actually come from the outdoor activities, a lot of it was

driven by extrapolating the brands into lifestyle settings. All outdoor brands seem to be experimenting with

this now.

[00:07:28]

Q: Could you outline VF Corp and the main brands driving growth for the company? What are some of the

brands’ strengths and weaknesses?

AvdS: VF Corporation has grown both organically and through acquisitions, ever since it was founded. It

organises its business in basically three pillars. One is the outdoor pillar, where The North Face and

Timberland are in, but also smaller brands such as Altra if you’re running, Icebreaker and Smartwool. Then

there is the work segment, which now just consists of Dickies, as VF has just diversified their business there

and completed the sale of the majority of the work brands, particularly more professional work brands there,

and they’ve kept Dickies in their portfolio. Then, the active segment, which is led by Vans as the main brand

there, but also has brands such as Supreme, which has been acquired at the end of 2020, Napapijri and

Eastpak, Eagle Creek and so on. Both the active and the outdoor segments are the majority of the revenue, and

they balance each other out quite well, so they’re roughly the same size, at around the USD 4bn mark it seems,

and then there’s the work segment which is smaller, following the divestiture of the majority of brands.

How VF is organised is VF is the portfolio company. Underneath it, the big brands, so those are The North

Face, Vans, Timberland and Dickies, I guess, and then there are regions and supporting functions as well.

With the appointment of Steve Rendle as the CEO in 2017, the company initiated a shift towards being really a

purpose-driven business, an organisation, and away from a bit more of a financial holding structure that they

had before, so really uniting the brands under a common purpose, which is advancing active lifestyles and also

driving sustainability across their business model. How VF is organised is a lot of VF’s functions are old

enabling functions that exist. Our supply chain is a really big part of that, so the VF supply chain organisation

is a backbone of the organisations that they plug the brands, put the brands in. Obviously, IT, finance, HR and

all these things are shared among the brands, and then the brands themselves are responsible for product

development, for marketing, for sales, merchandising, and e-commerce and the retail functions, so everything

that happens on the front.

The North Face was bought around 1999-2000. Vans was added to the portfolio in 2004, and then Timberland

in 2011, and particularly The North Face and Vans, they came in as much smaller brands than they are today.

VF has been able to really grow these brands rapidly to a significant scale, and build expertise in how to scale

these brands to the next level. That said, Timberland was much larger already than either The North Face or

Vans were when acquired by VF, and hasn’t scaled as much as the other brands have.

Private and confidential 4

[00:15:57]

Q: How might The North Face’s consumer engagement and distribution strategies differ from other brands in

the portfolio? Have you noticed differences in The North Face’s D2C growth rates vs Timberland or Vans?

How successful do you think VF’s December 2020 acquisition of Supreme has been?

AvdS: The brands each have their own identity and they sit on different growth trajectories. It’s also related to

their target consumer and audience, so whereas The North Face is targeting outdoor participants and people

in that space, Vans is targeting a bit of a younger crowd, but also a more lifestyle-oriented crowd, and

Timberland sitting in active outdoor segment, it kind of sits between outdoor and lifestyle. In terms of growth

rates, Vans has been leading the charge overall on the brand level over the last years, outgrowing The North

Face and definitely Timberland, and North Face was second and Timberland was third out of these big three

brands. The Vans growth and success story has really been driven through uptake of their shoes in big lifestyle

markets worldwide, and driven by a marketing machine behind it, whereas North Face’s growth has been

driven quite a bit by international expansions, particularly growth in Europe, which has been quite significant

for The North Face. If you, for example, look into the Q1 2021 figures, which are Q4 2021 for VF’s reporting

cycle, you can see that the European region is now as big as the US is for The North Face. This is quite a

significant shift from where this business was five years ago, when the US was definitely dominating this

space. Still, Europe is growing fast, so this balance might shift a bit more.

Interestingly, if you look into the channel mix, the whole of VF has been working on a shift towards more

direct-to-consumer and e-comm-driven, and building on their direct-to-consumer business, but there are

differences between brands and regions. For example, the direct-to-consumer business in Asia in Q1 just about

grew at about 70% or so, whereas in Europe it grew about 26%, and in America it was more or less flat. If you

look into what Timberland was doing, their direct-to-consumer business in Asia only grew by about 19% in Q1,

so there are definitely differences between the three brands here. I think it has to do with a couple of factors in

terms of how the business is composed overall, who the target consumers and audiences are, and how well the

brands are able to really drive pull on a direct-to-consumer level. That obviously has to do with brand strength

as well. VF is investing in its infrastructure there, both in e-comm and in D2C, so one of the things that the

company has done is keep all the stores open and alive through the COVID shutdowns, continued to pay their

staff, so they were able to hit the ground running when lockdowns eased, also driving that digital model, both

internal e-comm and also its key compartments.

Your second question was on Supreme. VF only just started to include Supreme in its portfolio. I think it will

take a little bit of time before we can see the real impact and the real change. Supreme did have a really good

Q1, and it seems to be absorbed well within the organisation, sitting in the active segment with Vans, as a more

premium lifestyle-oriented offer there. Those brands might complement each other well and go hand in hand

in this area.

[00:22:19]

Q: How would you assess VF’s dependence on wholesale, so whether the main brands are heavily wholesale

across channels? How does that compare to companies that want to pivot away from wholesale entirely or

keep that portion very small vs other distribution channels?

AvdS: I think all these brands, they grew out of wholesale models, so they were not D2C-native brands, let

alone digitally-native brands, so there’s quite a bit of legacy in the wholesale business for all three brands.

What we are seeing is that the direct-to-consumer channel, on average, is outgrowing the wholesale channel,

and on average, that balance is shifting towards a more D2C-driven business, but it does take time to get there.

I think what the brands have been focusing on is identifying, within the wholesale channel, those customers

that they believe in most, that can really work with the brand and have the biggest growth potential, and work

on partnering there and refocusing the activities on the most promising wholesale partners.

Private and confidential 5

There are some sectors there, I think, that can impact this. Obviously, the whole COVID situation has led to an

increase in digital, and if you look into the recent figures, you can see that the digital business of VF has really

grown exponentially, I would say, over the last year, while the wholesale business has been shrinking. Those

are highlights, I think, that come out, but there are differences between the regions. The Americas business is

maybe even a bit more wholesale-dependent than, for example, in Asia, where D2C is already the majority of

the segment. For The North Face, it’s about 50%. For Vans and Timberland, it’s also a little bit less than 50%.

These kinds of trends seem to even up. Overall, The North Face seems to have made the most progress in

moving to D2C, and Timberland, the least. The Timberland business specifically in the Americas is still really

reliant on wholesale, and that is definitely a key factor of attention.

[00:26:23]

Q: Do you think Timberland is still reliant on wholesale in the Americas due to the weight of the heavy boots

or is the target consumer demographic more likely to go in store than utilise online channels?

AvdS: I think it’s a bit of a combination of the brand itself, so Timberland is, in terms of brand recognition

and pull, not at the same level as Vans or The North Face are, so they generally attract more consumers to

their platforms and their website and are able to convert more consumers into sales. It also has to do with the

target audience of the brand, where Timberland’s target audience tends to be a bit older in age. It tends to be a

bit more rural, and these consumers, as you rightly said, tend to favour more the wholesale business. The third

point is the history of the brands and the pace at which brands have been moving towards digital, where

Timberland has started this transition later than North Face and Vans, so you can see that they still have quite

a bit of catch-up to do there and build out the business as well, and just the coverage in D2C in terms of store

exposure, there are just more North Face and Vans retail outlets than there are for Timberland. That

combination explains this dynamic, yes.

[00:28:33]

Q: How has The North Face maintained brand affinity over the years and reinvented itself? It’s an older

brand, but it can connect with younger consumers, which many brands don’t know how to do. What were the

strategic decisions around reinventing the brand to connect and keep up with the mature younger consumer?

AvdS: The North Face, ever since its acquisition by VF in the year 2000, has grown really rapidly throughout

the 2000s, but it had reached a point where growth had stalled a little bit or stabilised in the mid 2010s. It

realised that in order to accelerate this again, it needed to continuously connect to younger audiences. At that

point in time, The North Face was perhaps not as successful as the brand is today, as it lost a little bit of its

premiumness in the high-end segment and had lost also a bit of its brand positioning in the core outdoor

market that the brand was active in. The North Face did a couple of things. They really revised the strategy and

said, “We’re in the business of making outdoor cool again. How are we going to do this? We want to achieve

leadership in outdoor, but we also want to expand our brand into lifestyle, because that’s where we see the

growth, and we also see that activities are starting to blur, that versatility is on the rise, and our brand

currently is not really up to speed to take advantage of this.”

A couple of things happened. The North Face took a step back and said, “What is the real core of our brand,

our 50 years of exploration that we have inherited of The North Face, and how can we make that really count

again?” going back to owning the Never Stop Exploring platform and aligning all brand messaging there.

Then, what the brand also did was looking into both the premium outdoor segment as well as the more

commercial part under that, and relaunching innovation programmes, the Summit Series and other top-of-

the-range activities, to really own the premium space and from there, generate a licence to play in the more

commercial areas and develop a specific strategy for lifestyle. Whereas North Face before this was basically

just organised along outdoor and that was what the brand was doing, and any lifestyle presence was basically

outdoor products put into lifestyle channels or maybe at some different price points and these kinds of things.

Private and confidential 6

The North Face reorganised themselves into four distinct customer segments, which were outdoor, training

and running, a segment called mountain lifestyle and a segment called urban exploration. From outdoor

towards urban exploration, the focus on lifestyle increased, moving from segment to segment. There were

specific teams that were set up to drive this that were doing product development and merchandising and

marketing and a sales segmentation for each of those areas, so really treating this as separate businesses that

needed to be brought back to life, a strong focus on that Never Stop Exploring platform and how to take back

ownership of that and expand it from just outdoor towards those adjacent categories. Also, really using the

lifestyle activities and products there to drive connections with younger audiences through product design and

development, making the products a lot more stylish, younger, better silhouette, different kinds of materials,

focusing on city-based use cases and streetwear to the marketing stories behind it, including much more

lifestyle-based marketing, influencers and so on, rather than the athlete team that is used in outdoor.

Also, partnering with key customers that could help drive this forward, including retailers or wholesale

partners that were already in this mid-market segment. For example, in the UK, the brand partnered with JD

Sports Group, which previously didn’t carry North Face at all. They’re focused on sneakers and young

consumers in cities, carrying Nike and Adidas and so on, and The North Face came in as a new brand there,

partnering on brand developments, specific product development, marketing and so on, to do this and help

accelerate growth in the UK by a lot. Another thing that obviously North Face did was partnering with others,

and then collaboration, so the Supreme collaboration is an important example of this. The North Face

collaborated with Supreme on special editions and limited editions and drops that were aimed at bringing new

energy into the brand, and related to younger audiences based in cities, and created scarcity there as well.

I think also, clear segmentation, a move to online and brand storytelling, focusing on an experiential

programme rather than just transactional activities helped to drive the brand forward, so it really was a

combination of strategic revision, channel analysis and new partnering, building out direct-to-consumer

channels, revitalising product development and innovation, and really focusing on lifestyle segments through

that mountain lifestyle as well as urban exploration to create new brand heat there, and then partnering with

lifestyle platforms and influencers to do this as well. Still, they’re rooted in The North Face heritage, and

actually turning that fact that the brand is over 50 years old into an advantage, also turning around some of

the real classic products that North Face was known for, and giving them a bit of a new look and feel, and

relaunching those in the market and going broad there.

[00:37:09]

Q: You mentioned The North Face reinventing its brand by collaborating with Supreme. I assume this

happened pre-merger, but do you think The North Face can manage Supreme as a brand, rather than just

collaborate with it to improve brand scarcity? Supreme knows how to increase brand awareness and it’s very

sought after, but if it’s under new management, it could be easy to dilute what’s been paid for. What do you

think is The North Face’s ability to keep Supreme Supreme while improving it, rather than just scaling it and

perhaps diluting some of the brand equity the company had hoped to purchase?

AvdS: Obviously, Supreme sits in the VF portfolio, so it’s a kind of separate brand to North Face. There are

some interesting thoughts on that acquisition with Supreme. Clearly, Supreme added quite a bit to the VF

brand portfolio through those collaborations, and having this premium streetwear brand that was more or less

digitally native, I think, was an attractive addition to the VF portfolio. At the same time, the Supreme brand is

a bit of a different beast than what we have as in store, so it’s mostly digital. It doesn’t have a significant

wholesale presence. It doesn’t have a large store network, and it’s driven through a lot of word of mouth and

just being at the right place at the right time. VF is a bit of a machine, and I think VF, there might be a watch-

out in how the uniqueness of that brand can be preserved in the VF world.

VF has done quite well on larger brands, so The North Face, Vans, Timberland, Dickies, and building those

out. In terms of some smaller brands that were acquired like, for example, 7 For All Mankind that was part of

the VF portfolio at some point, it was premium jeans wear, that acquisition hasn’t played out that well within

VF, as the brand was probably a bit too small to get enough attention and support to be nurtured into

something bigger. The caveat will be if VF is able to divert enough resources to Supreme to really keep on

Private and confidential 7

boosting the brand there, and if it’s able to keep quite an independent position from VF and its own identity.

At the same time, what we can see with the Vans brand is it is part of the VF portfolio, but it has also been

allowed to grow pretty much as a standalone business out of southern California, and has really kept its own

face and audience, and has been able rejuvenate throughout time. VF does have credible expertise, I would

say, in keeping distinct brands with distinct brand identities while leveraging VF’s scale, but Supreme is a little

bit of an odd one out, so it will be, I think, interesting to watch how that gets approached.

[00:41:39]

Q: Supreme focuses on the streetwear market and you mentioned one of The North Face’s segments is

lifestyle. Does it make strategic sense for The North Face to have a line just for streetwear, given its seemingly

complementary collaborations with Supreme? Why not have two brands going after the same market but in

different categories, given that Supreme talked about a USD 50bn market opportunity within streetwear?

AvdS: That’s an interesting question, because North Face does have a premium streetwear collection. It sits in

the Black Series globally, and then there is Purple Label in Japan, which targets high-end city-based

consumers in that streetwear. Then you could argue that Supreme is in that space already. I don’t think

Supreme will become a part of North Face. I think it will stay as a standalone business and a standalone brand,

and continue to develop from there, just the same as how VF acquired Altra, which is a running brand, and

North Face also has running shoes in the trail running space, and they haven’t combined these, or Icebreaker,

which is also an outdoor brand but has been kept separately from North Face. What I think VF is doing is to

cover the market, looking into key high-growth segments, and see how the brand portfolio fits there, and

probably, with The North Face coming from that more outdoorsy lens and Supreme coming from really being

a streetwear-native brand and digital first, I guess they feel that overlap is not so much, and that those brands

together can really be very efficient there in those areas. If the brand identity of Supreme stays intact or is even

strengthened after this acquisition, then those collaborations can definitely still go forward and be successful. I

think that’s what VF will do, and look for synergies there.

[00:44:50]

Q: VF plays in many different channels – D2C stores, D2C digital, a large wholesale presence and a decent

international wholesale presence and many different brands in many regions. Do you think the company is

spread too thin? Are there some markets where the volume is not worth the added cost and resource drain,

and that could be better used if VF were to strategically focus on just three regions and three distribution

channels and really scale those markets, rather than playing in every market it can find?

AvdS: I think what VF has done over the last five years, with Rendle at the head, is actually critically looking

at the portfolio mix-up and the channel structure, and also how to support the brands. You will see that they’ve

divested quite a bit in the business, so they’ve divested the entire jeans wear business and spun that off into a

separate company. I know the Lee and Wrangler brands are no longer part of VF. They have condensed the

workwear segment to just Dickies, so it’s just a big brand there, and they’ve also spun off some other smaller

brands. At the same time, we also see some acquisitions coming in, but they seem to be sitting under these

three pillars, under two pillars really, so on the outdoor segment and on the active lifestyle segment. That

seems to be the focus, going forward, for VF, whereas Dickies still sits there, maybe it’s a bit of an odd one out,

but also I guess because it’s a pretty profitable brand for VF to own.

I do think that the company is naturally evolving towards a big-brand focus, so the company talks about Vans,

North Face, Timberland and Dickies in their reports. They call out specific growth rates and specific issues for

these four brands, and the smaller ones are usually grouped together in buckets. There are brand presidents

reporting now directly into Rendle for the big brands, which previously wasn’t the case, so previously there

was a layer in between with someone managing a portfolio of brands, which could be larger and smaller, and

they were reporting into Rendle. Now, the lines have been cut shorter and those big brands have been elevated

to a higher state, so there seems to be an increased focus there. In terms of strategic choices in channels, VF is

Private and confidential 8

definitely calling out a focus on digital and direct-to-consumer, so elevating direct channels and a focus on

distortion to Asia. Obviously, the US market is the backbone of VF, or has been historically, and that is where a

lot of the investments continue to go into, but in terms of distorting focus and investments, there’s a clear

choice to focus on Asia. It looks like the company is on that transition to do exactly that, to be more focused, to

have a clearer, cleaner portfolio, has been divesting some brands that were not in there, has been also

elevating VF as a company more and communicating more on a VF level, and also working on that purpose

there.

[00:49:20]

Q: Could you discuss VF’s missed opportunities or weaknesses around appealing to more women across its

brands and categories? What’s the dynamic of the demographic the company offers products to? Is there an

opportunity it could focus on more?

AvdS: VF doesn’t really call out that at a VF level, focusing on specific demographics or things like that. They

do talk about targeting consumers who have active lifestyles, and that’s the VF focus and how the portfolio is

being structured, and how acquisitions or divestitures are being decided. If you look at a brand level, there are

definitely opportunities to make the brands more diversified, so in terms of gender, North Face and Vans and

Timberland tend to be a bit more male-dominated. In terms of moving that more to female consumers, there’s

definitely opportunity and there are initiatives in the brands to do that, but progress seems to be quite slow.

For example, in North Face, also be less dependent on winter seasons, so North Face being one of the anchor

points of VF and also recently one of the bigger growth drivers, having taken over that position now from

Vans, who seems to be slowing down a little bit while North Face is accelerating a bit more, The North Face

has traditionally been a winter business, and the business is heavily impacted by whether there’s a cold winter

or not. Clearly, that’s a risk, certainly in the area of climate change, where winters start to tend to be milder.

One of the reasons also for driving through more lifestyle products or diversifying into training and running is

actually to also become less dependent on the winter season, and have a more four-season type of business

that runs all throughout the year and is less weather-dependent. Also, in lifestyle segments, you can be

weather-dependent, because heavy jackets are the most expensive products also in lifestyle, but it tends to be a

bit less than in outdoor. Obviously, also moving into more sportswear and footwear activities helps to become

less seasonally dependent, but that is something that The North Face brand is definitely focused on. I think

that one of the attention points that VF might have in the future is to look at the supply chain overall, which

has traditionally been a really good capability of VF. The supply chain organisation, the strength of the supply

chain has been a key strength, and there are quite a lot of investments and staff tied up in that capability. If

you look into recent trends in supply chain, moving towards more local production or distribution, reducing

CO2 footprints, customisation and flexibility and things like that, VF might be a little bit slow to move there,

because of historic trends. I think this could be a watch-out but also a potential opportunity to change the

approach there, and also move the whole supply chain sourcing and distribution function closer to market,

both for efficiency but also sustainability reasons.

[00:54:16]

Q: Is VF Corp progressing quickly with making The North Face less dependent on seasonal revenues by

targeting the athleisure or activewear category? Is the company innovating in athletic leisure? Is there a

blurred line between wearing a workout shirt to work out and wearing one to hang out? How successfully have

The North Face or any other VF brands penetrated this category?

AvdS: I think there are key distinctions between the three brands. Vans is obviously quite lifestyle native, so

yes, the brand comes out of the skateboarding heritage and uses that all through the communications, but

really it is a lifestyle brand and proposition, and it’s a lifestyle kind of consumer that buys Vans. They are

much less impacted by that seasonal business. That said, they are impacted by consumer trends, maybe more

directly than North Face and Timberland, who have also core consumers who use the products as part of

Private and confidential 9

activities that they’re doing. We see that now, so in Vans, there seems to be a bit of a slowing in the growth

rates. Maybe this is because the brand is losing a bit of the connection with the audiences, or there are some

other hip and upcoming lifestyle brands that are taking some of its share. Usually, this rotates again, so it

might pick up again as well.

If you look at Timberland, they have been maybe not so successful to bring rejuvenation into the brand and

connect to younger audiences, and also reduce their dependency on the heavy boots and other winter products

into more versatile and lighter streetwear or city wear activities. You can see that in the growth rates of the

brands over the last couple of years, which has not been as spectacular as either Vans or North Face. North

Face, coming from that outdoor world, has successfully initiated a transition into streetwear and lifestyle,

while still staying true to the core of the brand and the brand values. Obviously, that’s a watch-out, so how far

can you stretch the brand before you start losing your outdoor consumers? So far, this doesn’t seem to have

happened yet, because of the investments that the brand continues to do in product and innovation and

storytelling in the outdoor space and working in the athlete space and Never Stop Exploring platform there.

[00:57:53]

NH: Thank you, Alexandra. A really great Interview. Let me close by thanking you for your input and your

time today. Thank you, clients, for joining Third Bridge Forum’s Interview. If you’d like to speak with

Alexandra in a private call or meeting, please let your relationship manager know.

AvdS: Thank you, everyone. Bye-bye.

Transcription ends at 00:58:10 of the recorded material

Private and confidential 10