从热潮到冷静，DTC品牌的成长代价

在北美，DTC品牌的旺盛期起始于2010年。服装DTC品牌Everlane2011年成立，然后以“价格透明”为口号，很快被华尔街与投资人看成是新一代的Gap。2015年的时候，我非常喜欢的眼睛品牌Warby Parker已一笔来自沃顿商学院创业项目的2500美元种子投资，很快发展成了12亿美元估值的企业。于是很快各种新品牌都开始自称为“某某领域的Warby Parker”。那个年代，似乎零售门店将被淘汰，我们再也不会通过第三方渠道购物。连大家熟悉的耐克也在几年前宣布与Footlocker停止合作关系，原因就是想加强自己的DTC渠道，不让零售商赚钱，以提升自己的利润空间。

当然，我们现在回头看，DTC的发展并没有像当初很多人预测地那么顺利。十年过去了，那些刚刚提到的早期DTC明星品牌如今都走上了截然不同的道路。比如Warby Parker在经过几年快速增长之后，开始趋于平稳，它的市值从四年前上市时的近70亿美元，跌至如今的25亿美元。Everlane在2023年的零售营收大约为2亿美元左右，远远低于当时华尔街的预测，于是给人的感觉是这个曾经火红的品牌开始迷失方向。刚刚提到的Nike也是如此，由于DTC渠道并不如他们想象的容易，后来终于意识到与Footlocker中断合作关系是一个多么大的错误。

这些品牌的困境就是代表了整整一代DTC明星的失落。他们曾承诺通过掉零售商、砍掉分销商和转售加价费用来revolutionize零售、压低价格。然而，他们全面低估了获取新客户所带来的成本持续上升、线下零售店所带来的流量优势，以及投资人想很快赚钱所带来的压力。这些DTC品牌都有一个共性，就是以相对低成本来融资，但是融资以后却迅速扩张烧钱，结果最终难以承受估值所带来的负担。

这里与大家分享一下那些最早的DTC品牌如今的状况：

Warby Parker ：

其实Warby Parker是我最喜欢的DTC品牌之一，它眼睛框架设计的风格非常符合我们这个时代，purpose-driven的品牌定位也很吸引年轻人的视线。Warby Parker的联合创始人兼联席CEO Neil Blumenthal和Dave Gilboa至今仍在领导这家公司，这在DTC品牌里还是比较罕见的。尽管股价较2021年最高时下跌了近60%，但他们是眼镜市场里一个重要的品牌，我自己也几乎每年会去他们的零售店购买一些比较时髦的眼镜框，而且他们的购买过程也很新颖，退货也很容易。目前，他们已拥有276家门店，并且与Target达成合作，推出了验光服务。Warby Parker 虽然不再是“颠覆者”的光环品牌，但他们 2024年的营收仍超过7.7亿美元，最近他们与Google的合作，致力于开发人工智能眼睛，也说明他们仍然保持了早期DTC品牌创新的风格。

Everlane ：

刚才提到了Everlane曾被视为是“下一个Gap”，并雄心勃勃地想做到10亿美元营收，但如今已经偏离了当初的轨道。高层频繁更替、创意方向不断调整，如今正在尝试clean luxury的新定位，实际de 年收入也大约在2亿到2.25亿美元之间。虽然品牌仍有百搭基本款的优势，但与其他类似品牌相比显得没有任何的竞争优势。而且Everlane目前的风格也越来越像Aritzia，从一个创新者逐渐成为一个跟风的品牌了。

Glossier：

Glossier曾是千禧一代钟爱的美妆品牌，筹资超过2.6亿美元，但是目前却没有买家愿意收购，上市之路也越来越模糊。上周Justin Bieber的太太Hailey Bieber所创立的美妆品牌Rhode以10亿美元被收购，这些最新的收购动向也让Glossier显得很被动。Google Trends的数据说，Glossier搜索热度最高的关键词主要是merch（周边商品）和PR Kit (公关礼包)，而不是它真正要卖的美妆产品。

而且Glossier 市场营销策略主要依靠创始人 Emily Weiss 的个人品牌与故事来驱动发展。早期靠“品牌文化+女性赋权”这种品牌故事虽然获得巨大声量，但当品牌规模扩大后，内部管理、人力资源、组织结构等方面的问题就暴露出来。而且由于品牌形象几乎等同于创始人形象，任何公关危机都会直接打击品牌核心价值观，难以像多元化品牌那样快速调整。

那么，DTC 品牌的下一个十年会走向何方？回头来看，如果这些品牌当初选择的是小规模融资、稳健扩张的生活方式品牌路径，或许反而更能长久生存。在我看来，改变它们命运的，很大程度上是风险资本所带来的增长压力，以及一批缺乏实战经验的管理团队。只要借助互联网销售，就能将品牌包装成“科技公司”，结果既迷失了品牌的核心定位，也错失了真正建立产品力与用户关系的机会。

当然，上一代 DTC 品牌虽然在扩张过程中走了不少弯路，但这些经验反而为今天的新一代品牌提供了宝贵的借鉴，比如包袋品牌 Staud、以及主打加州田园风的女装品牌 Dôen 等。它们不是盲目追求增长，而是在品牌调性、产品设计和渠道策略上更加务实，逐渐形成了一套“轻资本、重产品、讲故事”的运营逻辑。

这些新一代的DTC品牌也知道仅靠线上直销很难支撑长期规模化增长。因此，注重批发渠道、品牌联名、线下快闪和长期门店经营等方式，不但能提供更稳定的收入结构，也能让品牌触达不同层次的消费者，增强市场穿透力。

因此，现在许多 DTC 品牌都不再坚持“去中间商”的单一逻辑，而是拥抱更加灵活的多渠道运营模式，包括线上直销 + 批发零售 + 战略合作等。这样的组合不仅提升了品牌曝光，也优化了库存和现金流管理，使品牌可以在不依赖大额融资的前提下实现可持续发展。

今天的新一代 DTC 品牌，不是不讲“直接面向消费者”，而是更清楚自己要面对哪些消费者、通过什么方式接触他们、以及在什么阶段该用什么节奏成长。这是一种更加成熟的商业思维，也是在上一波野蛮生长之后留下的深刻启示。

DTC Dreams vs. DTC Reality: What Comes After the Hype

In North America, the boom of DTC (Direct-to-Consumer) brands began around 2010. Everlane, a DTC apparel brand, was founded in 2011 and quickly gained attention on Wall Street and among investors with its promise of “radical transparency,” hailed as the next-generation Gap. By 2015, Warby Parker, a brand I really love, had grown from a $2,500 seed investment from a Wharton School entrepreneurship program into a company valued at $1.2 billion. Soon, new startups across different industries began branding themselves as “the Warby Parker of X.” At the time, it seemed like brick-and-mortar retail was on its way out. Even Nike cut ties with Footlocker a few years ago in an effort to strengthen its own DTC channels.

But looking back now, DTC’s growth trend hasn’t been nearly as smooth or revolutionary as many once believed. A decade on, those early star DTC brands have gone down very different paths. Warby Parker, after a few years of rapid growth, has plateaued. Its market cap has dropped from nearly $7 billion at IPO to around $2.5 billion today. Everlane’s retail revenue in 2023 was around $200 million, far below Wall Street’s early expectations, leaving the impression that the once-hyped brand has lost its direction. Even Nike eventually realized that cutting ties with Footlocker was a major strategic misstep, as the DTC channel turned out to be much harder than imagined.

These struggles reflect a broader generational downturn among DTC darlings. These brands once promised to revolutionize retail by cutting out the middlemen, distributors, retailers, and resale markups, offering better prices and direct relationships. But they vastly underestimated the rising cost of customer acquisition, the traffic advantages of physical retail, and the relentless pressure from investors to deliver fast returns. Many of these brands shared a similar pattern: raising capital at relatively low cost, then burning through it in aggressive expansions, only to collapse under the weight of inflated valuations.

Here’s a look at how some of the original DTC pioneers are doing today:

Warby Parker:
Warby Parker remains one of my favorite DTC brands. Its eyewear design fits fashion trend of our time, and its purpose-driven brand positioning continues to resonate with younger consumers. Its co-founders and co-CEOs, Neil Blumenthal and Dave Gilboa, are still leading the company, which is relatively rare among DTC startups. Though its stock has dropped nearly 60% from its 2021 peak, the brand remains a major player in the eyewear market. I still go to their stores almost every year to buy stylish frames; the purchase experience is always good, and returns are easy. Today, Warby Parker has 276 stores and a partnership with Target to offer eye exams. While no longer seen as a disruptive darling, the company generated over $770 million in revenue in 2024, and its recent collaboration with Google to develop AI-powered eyewear shows it still embraces innovation.

Everlane:
Everlane, once dubbed the “next Gap,” initially aimed to reach $1 billion in revenue, but it has since veered far from that goal. The company has gone through frequent leadership changes and creative shifts, and is now repositioning itself as a “clean luxury” brand. Its actual annual revenue now sits around $200–$225 million. While its basics remain versatile, the brand no longer stands out from competitors. In fact, its current style is beginning to resemble Aritzia more than a true innovator. Everlane has become a follower, not a leader.

Glossier:
Glossier was once the darling of millennial beauty lovers, having raised over $260 million. Today, it’s struggling to find a buyer, and its path to IPO remains murky. Last week, Hailey Bieber’s beauty brand Rhode was acquired for $1 billion, making Glossier’s uncertain status even more awkward. According to Google Trends, the top searches related to Glossier are for its merch and PR kits, not its actual beauty products.

Glossier’s marketing strategy has heavily relied on the personal brand and story of founder Emily Weiss. While its early “brand culture + female empowerment” narrative gained massive traction, as the company scaled, internal challenges in operations, HR, and organizational structure became increasingly evident. With the brand identity so tightly linked to Weiss, any PR issue directly hits the core values of the brand, making it difficult to pivot or adjust like more diversified brands can.

So, where is DTC headed over the next decade?
In hindsight, if these brands had opted for smaller funding rounds and pursued more stable, lifestyle-brand-style growth, they might have survived longer. In my view, what derailed them was largely the pressure of venture capital-backed hypergrowth, and a wave of leadership teams without much operational experience. With the internet, it became too easy to position a brand as a “tech company,” which ultimately distracted from building real product strength and authentic customer relationships.

Still, the lessons from that first wave of DTC may become valuable assets for the next generation. Brands like handbag label Staud and California-inspired womenswear brand Dôen are showing a more grounded approach. Instead of chasing hypergrowth, they’re focusing on brand voice, product design, and distribution strategy, building what you might call a “light-capital, product-focused, story-driven” business model.

These new DTC brands understand that online-only retail can’t sustain long-term scale. That’s why many now invest in wholesale partnerships, brand collaborations, physical pop-ups, and long-term store networks. These strategies provide more stable revenue streams and allow brands to reach broader consumer segments, deepening their market penetration.

As a result, today’s DTC brands no longer cling to a purist “cut out the middleman” model. Instead, they embrace a flexible omnichannel approach: direct-to-consumer online, wholesale distribution, and strategic partnerships. This hybrid structure not only boosts brand visibility but also optimizes inventory and cash flow, enabling more sustainable growth without heavy dependence on external capital.

Today’s new DTC brands aren’t abandoning “direct-to-consumer” as a concept. Rather, they have a clearer understanding of which consumers they want to reach, how to engage them, and when to scale at the right pace. It’s a more mature business mindset, and a hard-earned lesson from the messy, turbulent rise and fall of the DTC 1.0 era.