Words: Trevor Scott

Following the recent announcement that CDS group, owners of The Range, Homebase and Wilko, are looking for interested parties to run in-store ‘Kitchens by Homebase’ franchises, it is becoming ever more clear that more and more major players consider their best route to market for high ticket, long sale products such as fitted kitchens is the franchise one.

We already have any number of franchise opportunities – not least among them Kutchenhaus by Nobilia whose own meteoric growth can in some ways be laid at the door of the (eventually failed) Bunnings takeover of  Homebase as Nobilia, having lost a significant partner there, sought to replace sales by approaching a number of key Homebase Kitchens staff offering attractive franchise opportunities.  But where all of these require investment in a standalone showroom of whichever franchise has been opted for ‘Kitchens by Homebase’ proposal appears on face value to be very different.

So let’s drill down into it as best we can bearing in mind the limited information currently available…

The proposition is aimed at individuals with prior experience in fitted kitchens either as sales designers or managers.

The draw is the promise of low upfront costs and ready to go in-store locations plus full training, marketing, technical support with industry specific software and the name of trusted big brand behind them. Along with the guaranteed high footfall that any big shed offers it’s an exciting proposition isn’t it!

Well, is it?

Sounds to me like CDS group is looking for a low risk, low cost way of keeping an interested toe in the water of big ticket items such as fitted kitchens that have always been problematic for DIY chains but without all the hassle of employing staff and running the show themselves.

Basically passing this hot potato along to a group of individuals who will be invested in making a success of it as they own it. But will they actually own anything?

I suspect not. The term “licensee” is used rather than “franchisee”, which to my mind suggests they will only “own” the right to use the space under very controlled conditions. Which sounds rather more like being a manager than an owner, doesn’t it..?

All the responsibility of ownership but with none of the freedom of choice independence brings. Golden handcuffs, more like..!

For sure it will create clean departmental separation within The Range stores which has historically always been a cause of friction between DIY store management and kitchen department staff who don’t want to cover lunch breaks on the tills, or stack shelves with Christmas baubles!

In that sense, this model is not a weakness but more of a correction of where DIY multiples have got it wrong in the past but, and this is where it can get really messy, who “owns” the problems? Who “owns” the client?

Who will be answerable for design or survey errors? What about delayed, incomplete or damaged deliveries? Surely the buck stops with The Range head office rather than the ‘Kitchens by Homebase’ franchise/license owner? But will that be the case?

Who takes the money? What about finance, a mainstay of high-ticket volume sellers? Head office needs to be geared up to support licensees, but I foresee a lot of confusion, blame apportioning and finger wagging but little in the way of real customer service…

So just how ‘Low Risk’ is this proposition going to be?

I would suggest not very and it could well prove to be a disaster for all parties. Watch this space. It’s going to be very interesting to see how this one develops…