Darren Allison – Brands cannot expect showroom loyalty on reputation alone

Suppliers must do more than trade on reputation, says Frontline Bathrooms MD Darren Allison – they need to demonstrate how they will help retailers win sales, protect margins and deliver a return on the money and showroom space committed to their products

When a brand asks a showroom to invest in another display, it should be able to explain why that is a good decision for the retailer. An established relationship and a name customers actively ask for both count, but the showroom is committing fresh money and space. It needs to know what the brand will put behind that investment now.

Good brands give retailers plenty to work with, from desirable products and marketing that brings customers in, to the reassurance that helps secure an order. The service needs to follow through on that promise, with reliable stock, people who understand the range and proper help when something goes wrong. Goodwill built over years is worth protecting, not using as a substitute for doing those things.

What concerns me is brands expecting that showroom commitment while reducing support and pursuing every other route to market. They want distribution, direct supply to retailers and merchants, online consumer sales and a presence in DIY stores, without always providing the service each requires. Stock, delivery arrangements and aftersales support need to match the customers being served, rather than leaving existing partners to fill the gaps.

A showroom can fit the display, explain the product and help a customer choose, then lose the order because the same item is cheaper online or in a DIY store. Competition is part of retail, but a brand developing those channels cannot keep asking for the same showroom investment without addressing what has changed for the retailer. Helping create demand is of limited comfort when somebody else keeps getting the sale.

Moving from employed area sales managers to agents can raise similar questions. There are good agents who give excellent support, but where the change brings less training, fewer visits or nobody taking ownership of problems, the brand’s saving becomes somebody else’s workload. The responsibility for looking after the account remains with the brand, regardless of who takes the order.

Display funding and fitting can follow the same pattern. Some brands provide free displays and installation, while others have reduced their contribution because of the cost. The expense has not disappeared; the showroom is being asked to carry more of it, potentially while losing orders to other channels. Taken together, those decisions can leave a very different arrangement from the one the retailer originally bought into.

That is a difficult position to defend when credible own-label alternatives are available. Factories can supply comparable quality and styling, although the products are not necessarily identical. The lesson I take from Aldi and Lidl is that customers can put their confidence in the retailer’s selection too. A brand can still justify a premium through design, demand and support, but cutting that support gives the showroom one less reason to choose it.

Before putting more money into the range, the showroom should look at what the relationship is delivering. A recognised name may bring customers through the door, but that interest needs to turn into profitable sales. Time spent chasing deliveries and sorting out problems can eat into that return, so it needs to be part of the calculation. The showroom’s own advice and reputation also help give customers the confidence to buy, and the brand should recognise that contribution when asking for further investment.

The next display should come with a clear agreement about funding, fitting, training and who takes responsibility when help is needed. Where the brand is expanding elsewhere, the retailer deserves an explanation of how showroom sales will remain worthwhile.

Those of us in distribution should expect retailers to ask us exactly the same questions. We also have to earn the next order, and supplying an own-label range at a lower price does not excuse weak support.

Looking towards 2027, I expect showrooms to become more selective, backing brands that deliver and asking others for changes before renewing their commitment. I can also see some asking brands to pay for space where displays help generate sales completed elsewhere. That will not suit every relationship, but it recognises the cost of presenting products and advising customers.

A strong brand still deserves support when it helps the retailer succeed, but having stocked it for years is not a reason to keep investing if the relationship no longer works. Where service has fallen away, the brand needs to show how it will put things right before asking for another commitment. If it cannot, the retailer has good reason to put its money behind a supplier that gives it the support it needs.