Fundamental Thinking featured image

The Sticky Business of Smart Labels: Avery Dennison Finds New Sources of Growth

In the grocery business, some of the biggest challenges exist in the bakery department. Baked goods have a short shelf life, and stores have traditionally relied on inefficient methods to track “sell by” dates and manually apply reduced-priced stickers to packages as they near expiration. That’s why Kroger recently began testing labels embedded with radio-frequency identification (RFID) technology in its bakery sections. By wirelessly tracking this inventory, a supermarket can better manage food freshness and adjust prices without assigning workers to re-tag products.

The company behind Kroger’s RFID pilot program is Avery Dennison, which might surprise investors who are more familiar with its low-tech products such as mailing labels. Before Stan Avery invented self-adhesive labels, or stickers, nearly a century ago, labels had to be moistened with water to make them stick. Avery mailing labels later became a staple of office-supplies stores. Although the company sold its office- and consumer-products division to CCL Industries in 2013, adhesive technology remains the core of its business, used in everything from shampoo- and wine-bottle labels to barcode stickers, shipping labels, reflective films for traffic signage, customized apparel tags—and RFID labels.

Avery Dennison has been in the business of RFID technology since the early 2000s, but the technology didn’t immediately take off due to its high costs and a lack of readily available software to manage RFID data. In 2000, each RFID tag cost more than US$1, compared to 15 cents a decade ago and just 5 cents today. As technological advances and manufacturing scale brought down those costs, prominent retailers such as Macy’s and Marks and Spencer began using RFID-tagging systems, and it wasn’t until they demonstrated the benefits that other chains followed suit. In perhaps the most cutting-edge example, Avery Dennison customer Uniqlo uses RFID tags for all its merchandise, which has enabled the companies to create a touchless self-checkout system that doesn’t require the scanning of individual barcodes. Today, RFID labels generate just 10% of Avery Dennison’s total revenue, but sales of these products are growing significantly faster than the rest of the company’s businesses while also earning superior margins.

According to the company’s estimates, RFID technology has penetrated about 40% of the apparel market, where there are roughly 45 billion taggable units. The larger growth opportunity is in food, where there are over four times as many potential taggable units but very few companies are using RFID systems. In the past, an obstacle to using RFID labels for food was that the chips wouldn’t work under varying temperature and humidity conditions, preventing tagged products from being refrigerated or microwaved. Avery Dennison has since developed solutions to these problems, unlocking a new market.

As it pursues that growth opportunity, the company’s scale and vertical integration in RFID manufacturing are key competitive advantages. Inside an RFID tag are inlay components such as an antenna, microchip, and substrate to hold them together; the company has a 50% share of the RFID inlay industry and more than 1,500 patents to protect the design of its antenna and other tag properties. Its strength in this area has also supported continued investment in R&D to sustain its market leadership over the long run, such as developing designs suitable for customers in other markets, including logistics and health care.

Kroger’s initiative is important because, like the apparel industry, widespread use of RFID technology in the grocery industry will likely hinge on a few success stories among the big chains. The cost of RFID tags is also a key metric that investors should monitor; as that comes down, Avery Dennison can make a more compelling case to customers that the money saved from reducing their food waste and labor needs is worth the investment in an RFID system.

If Avery Dennison’s project for Kroger is successful, and the cost of the tags continues to fall, Kroger may be just the first of many grocers to switch to this method of tracking their perishables.

OOOM featured image

For Companies, the Tariff Question Folds Back Into Competitive Advantage

For investors trying to discern the effects of the Trump administration’s tariff policies on their stocks, there is a quick-and-dirty way to perform their analysis: Look at the countries in which a company manufactures its products, look at the tariffs applied to that country, multiply the top line by the tariff rate, and subtract that from gross profits.

In doing that, investors are assessing the first-order (direct impact on companies) and second-order (impact on demand) effects of the tariffs. That is what investors seemed to do in the wake of Trump’s April 2 announcement that the US would apply tariffs to virtually every country in the world. Shares of sporting-goods manufacturer VF Corporation, which has substantial operations in China and Vietnam, fell 41%. Hong Kong-based power-tools maker Techtronic Industries fell 23%. Polaris, which makes sports vehicles and has its largest factory in Mexico, fell 25%. French electrical-equipment manufacturer Schneider Electric fell 11%.

But the best indicator of how the tariffs will affect corporate profits comes from looking not at the first- or second-order effect, but at a third-order effect: The effect on companies’ competitive position. Companies don’t operate in a vacuum. They compete against each other. Yes, every company doing business in the US has to contend with the tariff issue. But some companies are better equipped to do so than others just by the nature of how their operations and supply chains have been set up. That is where the competitive advantages will become apparent. A foreign-domiciled company may not be at any disadvantage to a US-based one, and vice versa.

OOOM featured image

PayPal vs. Apple Pay: The Battle for Wallets Heats Up Again

To many iPhone users ensconced in the Apple ecosystem, PayPal may seem like a forgotten relic of the 2010s. Although the company was a pioneer in digital payments, in recent years, PayPal’s technology failed to keep pace with the increasing ease of Apple Pay and other digital wallets that offered contactless, or tap-and-go, functionality for in-store purchases. This technology, also called near-field communication (NFC), allows shoppers to hover their smartphone over a payment terminal to complete a transaction.

But the idea that PayPal lost its relevance isn’t true for the millions of people and merchants who do rely on it, especially for online purchases. More than 430 million PayPal accounts made a transaction through the platform in the past year, and it remains the leading digital wallet provider and the one accepted by the most retailers. The company also owns Venmo, a money-transfer app with social-media-like features that is popular with 18-to-29-year-olds, a slightly younger demographic than the PayPal brand targets.

Your perception of who is winning the battle to control your digital wallet is in some way dependent on which smartphone you use and what websites you shop at. Beyond PayPal and Apple Pay, there are Amazon.com’s Amazon Pay, Alphabet’s Google Pay, and Shopify’s Shop Pay, among others, each one fighting for your business. Smartphone ecosystems tend to limit awareness of alternatives to their baked-in services, making it hard for third-party apps that fade in popularity to claw their way back. However, PayPal still has key competitive advantages that may allow the company to reposition its platform as the default choice for more people.

OOOM featured image

Walmex’s Run-in with Regulators Shows What Really Makes a Retailer Tick

Walmex caught a break in December. The Mexican retailer, majority owned by US giant Walmart, received only a minor penalty–what amounted to about a US$5 million fine as well as some new restrictions and ongoing oversight—after a four-year investigation by Mexican regulators into the company’s business practices. Walmex’s stock rose as it appeared a severe penalty in the billions of dollars had been avoided.

And yet, Walmex plans to appeal the verdict by Mexico’s antitrust watchdog, the Federal Economic Competition Commission, or Cofece. To understand why the company wasn’t happy with a minor financial burden—Walmex earned US$657 million in the third quarter of 2024 alone—you need to understand how retailers such as Walmex make their money.