# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How come the discount giant couldn't expand its money-making machine?

Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash

Walmart is a money-making machine (in a good way). From east to west, the American retail chain has around 11,200 outlets in 27 countries.

I might be exaggerating, but Walmart is a household name in almost every...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Walmart is a money-making machine (in a good way). From east to west, the American retail chain has around 11,200 outlets in 27 countries. I might be exaggerating, but Walmart is a household name in almost every...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Walmart
Walmart is a multinational American company that runs chains of large discount department stores, supermarkets, and warehouse stores. It sells a variety of products, but they are most well-known for its low prices on groceries and household items. Walmart operates retail stores in various retailing formats in all 50 states in the United States. Also, it serves customers and members more than 200 million times per week at more than 8,416 retail units under 53 different banners in 15 countries. As one of the most successful retailers, it might come as a surprise that Walmart has not been successful when expanding in Europe. Throughout this content, we will demonstrate what went wrong in Germany that led Walmart to fail in the EU to sustain there.
Why did Walmart Fail in Germany?
Walmart's story in the EU has begun with its attempt to expand its business in Germany. In 1997, Walmart entered the German market with the acquisition of the Wertkauf and Interspar hypermarket chains. But Walmart's global fame and aggressive entry into foreign markets didn't work out well in Germany. Walmart's German stores struggled because its business model wasn't working there. It tried hard, but after 9-years, Walmart sold its 85 outlets in Germany in 2006 resulting in a $3 billion loss.

There were several factors that contributed to Walmart's Failure in Germany. From the very start, amazing management oversights have affected Walmart's German operations. We have figured out some of the important reasons behind their failure.

1. Below-Cost Strategy: Walmart wanted to follow the below-cost strategy, But the German business owners didn't like Walmart's low-cost pricing tactic as well as the German government. As a result, the American giant was ordered to raise its prices by the German high court which became an obstacle for it to having a customer base.

2. Walmart and German Unions Were Incompatible: In the United States, Walmart is notorious for playing low wages and suppressing unions. In Germany, unlike in the US, unions are very much a part of the culture and have broad support amongst the government, the community, and even businesses. Walmart didn't understand that in Germany, companies and unions are closely connected. Also, The German workforce is accustomed to negotiating their pay with their union. This caused friction between the workers and the company.

When Walmart refused to join Germany's regional wage bargaining system, the worker's union went on strike. Walmart was taken aback for this reason. This also gave them a bad reputation in the community and likely affected their sales.

3. Walmart Underestimated Their Competition: In the USA, Walmart has primarily been considered a low-cost, one-stop shop for just about anything a person could need.

In Germany, however, the people value the quality of products as much as they value the price. They weren't about to abandon the small grocery chains they had always shopped at. Walmart did not expect such resilience from the 14 hypermarket chains that were popular across Germany, and they failed to adapt even after they found out.

4. Retail Chains Were Already Doing Poorly in Germany: Part of the problem with Walmart's transition into Germany is that retail chains were growing at an alarmingly low rate at the time. In fact, when Walmart came into Germany, the average growth rate for a retail chain was just 0.3% per year. This acted as an immediate disadvantage in Walmart's journey towards sustainable growth in the country.

5. Employees Felt Uncomfortable With Walmart's Practices: It wasn't just the pay and lack of worker rights that upset Walmart employees. It was also some "team-building" practices that many Germans didn't feel comfortable doing.

At Walmart, workdays started with light exercises and motivational chants. While in US culture, these activities can sometimes bring a team closer together, in Germany, they are entirely unexpected and only served to make the employees uncomfortable.

6. Employees Felt That Walmart Overreached Into Their Personal Lives: In the United States and in many countries, it is taken as a given that employees that work in the same department cannot engage in romantic relationships. In Germany, however, this is not the standard. In fact, it is considered a huge overstep in a person's life.

7. Walmart Failed to Take Into Account Cultural Differences Surrounding Shopping: In the United States, it is considered commonplace or almost by default that people like to drive out to one store and buy everything they need there at a reduced price. This is part of why Walmart has been so successful in the US.

In Germany, on the other hand, shoppers have different habits, and the way the economy is structured lends more significance to smaller discount chains. Below are just a few differences in culture, which caused fewer Germans to go to Walmart and more to go to smaller chains.

Many Germans like to shop at places that are within walking distance. The idea of "service with a smile" is not as emphasized in Germany and came across as odd and uncomfortable. Smaller discount chains in Germany can sell goods at lower prices than big retail chains by law.

Walmart enforced a corporate culture that ran counter to the values of many Germans. On the other hand, the small chains were in line with their beliefs.

8. Walmart Didn't Focus Their Services Enough: Walmart sells just about anything a person would need; food, clothes, entertainment, car parts, gardening supplies, and more. Given the German population's tendency to shop at smaller, more focused stores, this didn't work on a cultural level.

It also didn't work on an economic level. Part of the reason Walmart can sell so many goods at such a low price in the US is that they receive tax subsidies and pay workers a lower wage.

As we've seen previously, they were challenged on all of these issues. Still, they tried a more focused approach, perhaps on groceries or home goods, they could have carved out a corner of the market.

9. Walmart Failed to Adapt to Germany's Economy: You put all this together, you get the primary reason why Walmart failed to gain any steam in Germany. They could not, and would not, adapt to the different economic systems.

To conclude, Walmart failed in Germany and eventually in the EU due to a variety of factors including the inability to adapt to german retail market conditions, lack of competitive prices against Garman stores, underestimated local competition, environmental cultural differences, and different organizational rules, and corporate culture for Walmart employees. If the folks at Walmart had been more proactive in studying Germany's economic system and consumer habits, their stores might not have failed. We hope that you understand why Walmart failed in Europe. If you have found our conversation helpful, please leave a comment, share our post, and subscribe to our blog.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Walmart Failed in Germany and Europe: The Main Reasons

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Walmart Why did Walmart Fail in Germany? Walmart's story in the EU has begun with its attempt to expand its business in Germany. In 1997, Walmart entered the German market with the acquisition of the Wertkauf and Interspar hypermarket chains. But Walmart's global fame and aggressive entry into foreign markets didn't work out well in Germany.

# data[].attributes.body
1. They dropped their prices lower than the local German stores

2. Walmart Failed to Understand the German Culture

3. Employees Were Made to Chant “Walmart, walmart”

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 1997, Wal-Mart had entered in the German retail market through acquiring the failing German retail chain Wertkauf but quickly encountered problems. Wal-Mart had demonstrated phenomenal success in the US by providing an Every Day Low Prices Guarantee, inventory control, and efficient distribution.

Walmart failed the endeavor because they attempted to apply their proven US success formula in an unmodified manner to the German market, and through the process, they failed to offer German customers any compelling value proposition in comparison with its local competitors.

Walmart can boast that it has more than 8,500 stores in 15 countries, under 55 different names, that it's the largest private employer in the United States, the largest in Mexico (as Walmex), and the third largest in Canada. In fact, it's the biggest private employer in the whole world. It has 108 stores in China alone, and operates another 100 Chinese outlets under the name of Trust-Mart.

Still, for all of Walmart's conspicuous success, the retailing giant, after having set up shop in Germany in 1997, was forced to withdraw from the country in 2006, abandoning Germany's lucrative $370 billion retail market. Even though this happened five years ago, the German debacle still reverberates. It's still being discussed. After all, as anyone who's been paying attention can tell you, Walmart rarely fails in these endeavors.

Because America and Europe share similar cultural and political antecedents, one might naturally assume that an American enterprise would have a better chance of succeeding in Europe than in Asia. But the German smackdown proved that's not always the case. Indeed, while the nominal Communist regime of the People's Republic of China embraced Walmart's corporate philosophy, the Germans rejected it.

Though no one can say precisely why the venture failed, there's been no shortage of explanations. One is that Germany was too "green" for a slash-and-burn outfit like Walmart, with its plastic bags and plastic junk Another is that Walmart couldn't hack the pro-labor union culture of Germany. Another is that Germany is anti-American when it comes to name-brand retailers (even though Dunkin' Donuts and Starbucks are popular there). Another is that German consumers prefer small neighborhood stores rather than impersonal chain (even though Aldi, a discount supermarket chain, is successful).

While there is probably some validity to all of these explanations, three additional cross-cultural idiosyncrasies have been identified as determining factors.

One issue was the chanting. Walmart employees are required to start their shifts by engaging in group chants and stretching exercises, a practice intended to build morale and instill loyalty. Fiendish as it sounds, Walmart employees are required to stand in formation and chant, "WALMART! WALMART! WALMART!" while performing synchronized group calisthenics.

Unfortunately, this form of corporate boosterism didn't go over particularly well with the Germans. Maybe they found it embarrassing or silly; maybe they found it too regimented. Or maybe they found this oddly aggressive, mindless and exuberant exercise in group-think too reminiscent of other rallies....like one that occurred in Nuremberg several decades earlier.

Another issue was the smiling. Walmart requires its checkout people to flash smiles at customers after bagging their purchases. Plastic bags, plastic junk, plastic smiles. But because the German people don't usually smile at total strangers, the spectacle of Walmart employees grinning like jackasses not only didn't impress consumers, it unnerved them.

The third was the "ethics problem." Back in 1997, Walmart not only required employees to spy on fellow workers (and report any misconduct), but prohibited sexual intimacy among its employees. Apparently, while the folks running the Bentonville, Arkansas-based company had no problem with screwing the environment, they couldn't abide employees doing it to each other (alas, a German court struck down Walmart's "ethics code" in 2005).

Whatever the specific reasons, the German market is now verboten to Walmart. Clearly, the failed experiment was a severe blow to the company's pocketbook and pride. And while no one can predict where a company as aggressive and acquisitive as Walmart will turn up next, presumably, they will pick up the slack by opening a store in Libya.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 1997, Wal-Mart had entered in the German retail market through acquiring the failing German retail chain Wertkauf but quickly encountered problems. Wal-Mart had demonstrated phenomenal success in the US by providing an Every Day Low Prices Guarantee, inventory control, and efficient distribution.

# data[].attributes.body
Local food options are plentiful and prices are lower than international brands like McDonald’s

Only 1% of Vietnamese consumers' food budget is spent on fast-food restaurants, showing a strong preference for local vendors and street stalls.

# data[].attributes.body
Consuming heavy sweets first thing in the morning is not at all a part of the Indian culture.

Unlike the West, where customers love coffee, Indians prefer another beverage called chai.

The average cost for two in Dunkin’ Donuts in India can be around ₹600 — which is a lot for most people who are earning a near-average or below-average salary.

# data[].attributes.body
• operational costs were high

• we’re not taking into account all the consumer preferences: preference of healthy breakfasts and traditional dishes

# data[].attributes.body
1. legal restrictions on undercutting competitor prices

2. clash with german labour laws + trade unions

3. underestimating entrenched local retail chains

4. overall struggles in mature german retail sector

5. rejection of Walmart’s corporate culture by employees

what could they have done differently

1. they could have taken a more localised approach by tailing its stores and offer products that better suit the preferences of german consumers

2. they could understand cultural differences by investing more in german culture

3. they could have respected labour laws as walmart got criticised for its treatment of employees and resistance to labour unions

4. they could build relationships with local suppliers and government officials to help walmart navigate the complexity of the german market

# data[].attributes.body
Starbucks faced challenges due to strong local competition, high operating costs, and a mismatch with local coffee preferences. The Australian market already had a well-established café culture, and Starbucks' standardised menu didn't resonate with the diverse and discerning tastes of Australian consumers.

Starbucks could have adapted its menu to better align with local preferences, offering a more diverse and customised range of coffee options. Building partnerships with local suppliers and emphasising the café experience could have also played a role in integrating with Australia's established coffee culture.

# data[].attributes.body
Vietnam is not unfamiliar with fast food, in fact they have loads of options no matter where you are. Vietnam locals were not getting access to McDonald’s food at a faster pace compared to other establishments. The difference like service speed was not really noticeable.

# data[].attributes.body
• consumer behaviour and preference research

• cheaper running costs

# data[].attributes.body
Local Vietnamese Pho is faster and cheaper than McDonald’s, with high cost performance

# data[].attributes.body
Prices were too high

Products contained too much sugar

Expansion of store was too fast

Didn’t cater for the Australian cafe culture

Change products to fit with the Australian consumers needs

Start with a small number of store to establish their brand and then expand

Change their sales systems to fit in more with the cafe culture in Australia

# data[].attributes.body
The timing of Starbucks' entry into Australia coincided with economic challenges, including a global economic downturn. This made it difficult for Starbucks to thrive and forced consumers to be more price-conscious.

# data[].attributes.body
McDonald’s had heavy competition before it started as the Vietnam food industry was thriving at the time

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What if people just don't like sweets?

How would you react if someone told you that they don't like donuts?

They're the good, sweet things that just melt in your mouth and make you say, "Oh God, this is so good."

It's fair to assume that almost everyone will agree that donuts taste good - even the health-conscious people who only have one donut every year.

However, one of the most renowned donut shops in the world, Dunkin' Donuts, couldn't wow the Indian market.

In 2018, the Massachusetts-based coffeehouse and donut company had to close more than half of its outlets in India.

"We have shut our most unprofitable stores, cut back on restaurant operating costs and overheads, focused on core categories, and launched innovations including tea, to drive growth," a Dunkin' Donuts franchise's spokesperson said.

So without further ado, let's understand why this happened.

"I like to eat donuts for breakfast," said no Indian customer that I have ever met. Consuming heavy sweets first thing in the morning is not at all a part of the Indian culture. Dunkin' Donuts is known to be a breakfast-focused fast-food joint, but the breakfast habits in India are totally different.

If you haven't been to India, you need to realize that it's a huge country with hundreds of languages and cultures. Also, the cuisine changes in every different region, drastically.

For example, North Indians like to eat a traditional Indian bread called Paratha (as shown in the image) for breakfast. A Paratha can be accompanied with some curry, pickles, or can be simply consumed with butter - just like bread and butter in the West.

Shown in the image below is a variety of South Indian breakfast food. Starting from left, Medu Vada, which is like an Indian fritter; Idli, a type of savory rice cake; and Dosa, a thin bread made from rice flour that looks like a crepe.

The bottom line - whether it's the North or South, Indians have a huge variety of breakfast food that they're used to eating for centuries. Not to mention the British colonialists brought the sandwich to India, and Indian customers love it to this day. However, they made some Indian changes to the recipe to better suit their taste.

Then, all of a sudden, Dunkin' Donuts showed up in India in 2012. But Indians, who were used to their usual breakfast food, which happens to be savory in taste anywhere in the country, didn't want to consume a big pile of fried, sugar-coated, spongy substance called a donut.

Unlike the West, where customers love coffee, Indians prefer another beverage called chai.

You must have had a chai latte or even a vanilla chai latte, but the way Indians make chai is totally different. Also, the ingredients are different as well - there's no almond milk, maple syrup, or cinnamon in an Indian chai.

It usually contains milk, sugar, and dried tea leaves. Ginger and cardamom are also added occasionally to create a unique flavor.

But Dunkin' Donuts went to the Indian market with its espressos and iced teas, something that most Indian customers weren't used to. This is kind of like what Starbucks did in Vietnam - they sold the wrong type of beverage and failed.

However, it seems like the company realized this mistake, and as of today, chai is available in the handful Dunkin' Donuts outlets that are left in the South Asian country.

Indian cuisine has more sweets than you can count on all your fingers. So a "donut" had to be something really, really special and different. Unfortunately, it isn't. Even a dozen different varieties of donuts can't compete with the local sweet snacks, which occur in hundreds.

Just because it's not common to eat sweets for breakfast doesn't mean there's no room for such products in the market. In fact, the demand is huge.

In India, there are hundreds of family-owned businesses, known as the Mithaiwalas (sweet sellers), that have been selling sweet snacks for decades. Dunkin' Donuts, an American brand in India, had to compete with these local outlets, who had a deeper rapport, cultural similarities, and a strong kinship with the local customers.

A donut was seen as a "once in a while" and "let's try something different today" type of thing by the small number of Indian customers who were westernized enough to be open to visiting Dunkin' Donuts.

The average salary in India is around ₹30,000 (Indian Rupees) per month, which is equivalent to $420 in the United States.

According to Zomato, the average cost for two in Dunkin' Donuts in India can be around ₹600 - which is a lot for most people who are earning a near-average or below-average salary.

The price itself alienates millions of people, and this is one of the reasons why Dunkin' Donuts might never go mainstream in India.

Well, not all premium-priced Western chains fail in India. KFC, for instance, is doing good and has around 400-500 stores in the land of vegetarians. For one, KFC's main items are savory, not sweet. Secondly, KFC's recipe is really unique as compared to India's chicken curry, which gives it a unique selling point.

Because of the product and premium pricing, Dunkin' Donuts had, and is still having, a hard time growing their business.

Not saying the business will go extinct. The Indian market is huge, and there might always be someone who would want to try the company's menu every once in a blue moon. However, long-term growth is expected to be slow.

What are your opinions on Dunkin' Donuts? Let me know in the responses.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
They're the good, sweet things that just melt in your mouth and make you say, "Oh God, this is so good." It's fair to assume that almost everyone will agree that donuts taste good - even the...

# data[].attributes.body
McDonald's struggled in Vietnam due to competition from local vendors, high prices compared to local options, and the ability of local vendors to serve more people at a lower cost.

Also,Any $3 meal is considered luxury. Beside, McDonald's menu is perceived as unhealthy. In Vietnam, you would find that the vegetables take up about 1/3 of most dishes. People generally prefer a more balanced diet, that's why things like burgers or fries have never been the trend.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why did Dunkin Donuts fail to set its foot in India? | Dunkin Donuts Failure

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dunkin Donuts is a famous American doughnut company. The company tried to set its foot in india but failed misrably lets find out Why dunkin douns fiale in ndina.

# data[].attributes.body
There is no price advantage, the local Vietnamese diet is relatively healthy and cheap. Food preferences are different, and McDonald's does not investigate local food preferences enough. The market positioning is vague, and McDonald's positioning of its own high-quality food is contrary to the local dietary needs of Vietnam.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
HOW STARBUCKS MISSED THE MARK IN AUSTRALIA

From its humble origins in Seattle, Washington, Starbucks has grown into one of the largest coffee brands in the world. In 2021, the company generated $29 billion in revenue. It currently manages over 30,000 stores around the globe and has seen success in a wide variety of locations, ranging from Shenzhen to the CIA Headquarters in Langley, Virginia. With such a proven track record, why did Starbucks struggle to find traction in the Australian market?

AMBITIOUS EXPANSION PLANS

On paper, Australia looked like a golden opportunity for Starbucks. The country's GDP is 1.3 trillion, making Australia the 13th largest economy in the world. The country has a thriving coffee culture. In fact, the Australian coffee industry was worth $5.8 billion USD in 2021. The first Starbucks opened in Australia in 2000. By 2008, Starbucks was operating 87 locations across the country, which translates to roughly 11 openings per year. This rapid pace outstripped the organic growth of Starbucks popularity in Australia. In an interview with CNBC, Thomas O'Connor, a Research Analyst at Gartner Inc, said, "They launched too rapidly and didn't give the Australian consumer an opportunity to really develop an appetite for the Starbucks brand." Unlike in the United States, Starbucks did not organically grow with demand. Because the brand was over-extended in the market, Starbucks "accumulated $105 million in losses in its first 7 years in Australia." It borrowed $54 million from the US in an attempt to keep doors open in the country, but in 2008, the company closed two-thirds of its Australian locations as it struggled in the aftermath of the global financial crisis.

FAILURE TO ADAPT

Starbucks failed to adapt its American business model to the Australian market. Nick Wailes, Professor and Deputy Dean at University of New South Wales in Kensington, Australia, notes, "I think one of the problems with Starbucks...is they thought that their business model could just roll out to a different environment." He highlights that any business looking to expand must take the time to build a sound business strategy and be prepared to pivot when entering any new market. International expansion is difficult, and businesses cannot simply copy and paste their growth strategy. American and Australian coffee cultures have subtle differences that have important ramifications for American coffee brands trying to enter the market.

The beginnings of Australian coffee culture is credited to Italian and Greek immigrants that began emigrating to the country during the mid 20th century and introduced Australians to espresso. By the 1980s, Australians had developed their own distinctive coffee drinks, like a flat white or Australian macchiato.

Born from these immigrant communities, Australia's coffee culture is also unique because it places such a high value on socialization at coffee shops. Starbucks' convenience and to-go focused cafes were the wrong approach for the Australian market. Fundamentally, Starbucks struggled in Australia because it approached the market with an American coffee culture, which places more emphasis on coffee as a commodity or quick source of caffeination. The Starbucks menu, with a wide selection of sugary drinks, also didn't appeal to the local Australian tastes.

DOMESTIC COMPETITION

Starbucks wasn't cost competitive in Australia, with drinks often costing significantly more than local coffee shops. As one report explained, "Australians opted to pay less for coffee they liked from a local barista they trusted." At the time, one of the biggest competitors in Australia was Gloria Jeans. Ironically, the company was another American brand founded in Chicago. Gloria Jeans operates more than 400 stores across Australia and serves more than 35 million customers annually. Industry experts attribute the success to Gloria Jean's ability and willingness to tailor its offerings to the Australia market. Unlike Starbucks, the Gloria Jean menu included many espresso and Australian speciality drinks that helped the company gain traction in the market.

FUTURE IN AUSTRALIA

Starbucks missed the mark in Australia because they expanded too rapidly, failed to adapt their American business model, underestimated domestic competition, and didn't understand the unique needs of the existing Australian coffee culture. In short, they failed because they didn't prioritize strategic growth. In 2008, the company was forced to close "more than two-thirds of its stores on the continent." Today, Starbucks still has some remaining locations, but primarily targets internationals, like students, living in Australia. They "want to be a familiar face in the crowd" for Chinese and American tourists.

Starbucks' difficult expansion into Australia highlights the importance of strategic international expansion. Businesses cannot expect to replicate success in a new market without first understanding the unique set of challenges that shape the opportunity in a new market. We would love to discuss how our team can help your business develop a strong international expansion plan. Click here to schedule your free consultation today.

Fill out the form below
to download our insight

From its humble origins in Seattle, Washington, Starbucks has grown into one of the largest coffee brands in the world. In 2021, the company generated $29 billion in revenue. It currently manages over 30,000 stores around the globe and has seen success in a wide variety of locations, ranging from Shenzhen to the CIA Headquarters in Langley, Virginia. With such a proven track record, why did Starbucks struggle to find traction in the Australian market?

AMBITIOUS EXPANSION PLANS

On paper, Australia looked like a golden opportunity for Starbucks. The country's GDP is 1.3 trillion, making Australia the 13th largest economy in the world. The country has a thriving coffee culture. In fact, the Australian coffee industry was worth $5.8 billion USD in 2021. The first Starbucks opened in Australia in 2000. By 2008, Starbucks was operating 87 locations across the country, which translates to roughly 11 openings per year. This rapid pace outstripped the organic growth of Starbucks popularity in Australia. In an interview with CNBC, Thomas O'Connor, a Research Analyst at Gartner Inc, said, "They launched too rapidly and didn't give the Australian consumer an opportunity to really develop an appetite for the Starbucks brand." Unlike in the United States, Starbucks did not organically grow with demand. Because the brand was over-extended in the market, Starbucks "accumulated $105 million in losses in its first 7 years in Australia." It borrowed $54 million from the US in an attempt to keep doors open in the country, but in 2008, the company closed two-thirds of its Australian locations as it struggled in the aftermath of the global financial crisis.

FAILURE TO ADAPT

Starbucks failed to adapt its American business model to the Australian market. Nick Wailes, Professor and Deputy Dean at University of New South Wales in Kensington, Australia, notes, "I think one of the problems with Starbucks...is they thought that their business model could just roll out to a different environment." He highlights that any business looking to expand must take the time to build a sound business strategy and be prepared to pivot when entering any new market. International expansion is difficult, and businesses cannot simply copy and paste their growth strategy. American and Australian coffee cultures have subtle differences that have important ramifications for American coffee brands trying to enter the market.

The beginnings of Australian coffee culture is credited to Italian and Greek immigrants that began emigrating to the country during the mid 20th century and introduced Australians to espresso. By the 1980s, Australians had developed their own distinctive coffee drinks, like a flat white or Australian macchiato.

Born from these immigrant communities, Australia's coffee culture is also unique because it places such a high value on socialization at coffee shops. Starbucks' convenience and to-go focused cafes were the wrong approach for the Australian market. Fundamentally, Starbucks struggled in Australia because it approached the market with an American coffee culture, which places more emphasis on coffee as a commodity or quick source of caffeination. The Starbucks menu, with a wide selection of sugary drinks, also didn't appeal to the local Australian tastes.

DOMESTIC COMPETITION

Starbucks wasn't cost competitive in Australia, with drinks often costing significantly more than local coffee shops. As one report explained, "Australians opted to pay less for coffee they liked from a local barista they trusted." At the time, one of the biggest competitors in Australia was Gloria Jeans. Ironically, the company was another American brand founded in Chicago. Gloria Jeans operates more than 400 stores across Australia and serves more than 35 million customers annually. Industry experts attribute the success to Gloria Jean's ability and willingness to tailor its offerings to the Australia market. Unlike Starbucks, the Gloria Jean menu included many espresso and Australian speciality drinks that helped the company gain traction in the market.

FUTURE IN AUSTRALIA

Starbucks missed the mark in Australia because they expanded too rapidly, failed to adapt their American business model, underestimated domestic competition, and didn't understand the unique needs of the existing Australian coffee culture. In short, they failed because they didn't prioritize strategic growth. In 2008, the company was forced to close "more than two-thirds of its stores on the continent." Today, Starbucks still has some remaining locations, but primarily targets internationals, like students, living in Australia. They "want to be a familiar face in the crowd" for Chinese and American tourists.

Starbucks' difficult expansion into Australia highlights the importance of strategic international expansion. Businesses cannot expect to replicate success in a new market without first understanding the unique set of challenges that shape the opportunity in a new market. We would love to discuss how our team can help your business develop a strong international expansion plan. Click here to schedule your free consultation today.

Stay Informed

Sign up to receive news and updates.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!

Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

We care about your data in our privacy policy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
HOW STARBUCKS MISSED THE MARK IN AUSTRALIA | Insights

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From its humble origins in Seattle, Washington, Starbucks has grown into one of the largest coffee brands in the world. In 2021, the company generated $29 billion in revenue. It currently manages over 30,000 stores around the globe and has seen success in a wide variety of locations, ranging from Shenzhen to the CIA Headquarters in Langley, Virginia.