Shelf Stock Monitoring Dubbed RFID’s First “Strong Business Case”

Written by Evan Schuman
August 21st, 2008

After years of trials with only the rarest evidence of CFO-friendly RFID ROI, shelf stock monitoring is quickly emerging as "the first major application of RFID in retail with a strong business case," according to a new report from London-based RFID analyst firm IDTechEx.

"Numerous apparel companies have reported increased sales of as much as 20 percent using RFID to monitor shelf stock levels," the report said. "In 2008, IDTechEx research finds that 38 percent of the money spent on RFID in retail is specifically for apparel tagging."

Clothing in particular is proving to be a lucrative RFID segment. "In 2008, the total money spent on RFID tags and systems for apparel will be $68 million, which is a huge 38 percent of the total amount spent by retailers on RFID globally," the report said. "This reflects the surge in activity of apparel tagging given the demonstrated business case by an increased number of retailers. By 2013, the amount spent on apparel RFID will rise to $988 million."

Beyond apparel, though, RFID is still on a bumpy road to a solid business case, the analysts said. "Most other forms of consumer goods beyond apparel are later in adoption of RFID at item level because they are more troublesome technically. This is because so many of them involve metal and water and a greater challenge to RFID pricing because so many of them are much lower in price than apparel," wrote IDTechEx Chairman Peter Harrop. "It is rare for payback calculations to justify a tag costing more than a few percent of the value of the product it is on."

The clothing retailers who have—initially, at least—made those business arguments prove the point, he wrote.

"Marks and Spencer in the U.K. was the first in the world to tag apparel in shops in a big way and, in 2010, it is on track to have these disposable swing tags on all its 350 million items of apparel passing through yearly. The payback, primarily from reducing out-of-stocks, being an unmissable one year in the estimation of IDTechEx," the report said. "This is despite the tag not being interrogated at the checkout and not usually present on returned goods because it is large and the first thing to be removed by the customer after purchase. The company has bought more RFID tags than any other retailer or consumer goods company in the world."

In another example, the report said that American Apparel completed an inventory RFID trial and found that inventory "exceeded 99 percent and sales increased by 15 to 25 percent when all items were available on the floor. The value of each piece of apparel versus the cost of the tag makes a strong payback calculation."


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.