November 12, 2025
TPOPhoto/Depositphotos.com
Will Shrinking Help Puma Re-Spark Brand Heat?
Puma recently unveiled a transformation plan that involves significantly reducing its product range and distribution in order to revive “brand heat,” return to growth in 2027, and ultimately establish itself as a top-three global sports brand.
Moves to reduce SKUs and distribution from less-desirable accounts are often used by consumer brands losing appeal.
“Puma has to address the fact that it has become too commercial, which is reflected in muted brand heat, low distribution quality, and a product offering that is not cutting through in the market,” said Arthur Hoeld, a former Adidas executive who in April became Puma’s CEO, in the brand’s third-quarter results statement.
On a call with analysts, Hoeld noted that the brand commissioned a study at the beginning of the year that ranked Puma as “less relevant” than eight other brands in the sports space.
One reason cited for the diminished brand heat is because Puma’s direct-to-consumer (DTC) business is only 30% of sales, while most competitors are at 40%. The DTC de-emphasis “limits our opportunity to showcase our products, to excite consumers directly with our storytelling, and also determine how we’re going to show up in the marketplace,” said Hoeld.
Puma Making Strategic Moves To Recapture Consumer Attention
While targeting higher growth in e-commerce and brick-and-mortar channels to match competitors, Puma is scaling back distribution at “undesirable” wholesale accounts. Hoeld noted that three of the brand’s top 10 customers are “mass merchants,” or chains focusing on off-price selling — often selling last season’s merchandise, alongside limited brand control and broad distribution.
He said the rationalizing distribution, and reducing currently-bloated inventory levels, will impact top-line growth, but is critical to improving pricing integrity. Hoeld said, “We have started to clean up. That is something which we’ll continue to do in the next couple of quarters as well, actually. And also, most notably, we have reduced the discounts in our very own channels.”
Puma also plans to “significantly reduce” its product range, with Hoeld noting that the brand’s extensive range of products has led to its “icons,” or hero products and innovations, not standing out in the marketplace. Hoeld said, “Consumers don’t really know when you’re asking them about Puma, what is the key product that that brand stands for? And that is certainly a huge opportunity for us.”
Hoeld also said Puma, in the past, had a tendency to scale franchises “too fast and too soon” — a move that limited the brand’s commercial potential. He added, “We’re not efficient enough when it comes to our lifecycle management.”
Puma Seeks Better Storytelling, Unified Teams To Reach New Heights
Toward that end, Puma is reorganizing its product, marketing and sales teams to support a more unified go-to-market approach and elevated storytelling. Hoeld said, “We will be very focused to really have fewer stories out there that cut through and hit the nerve of today’s consumers. All of that with a clear ambition that each and every initiative that we’re investing behind will have to create a brand halo effect for the entire Puma brand.”
The restructuring will also involve slashing its cost structure, including cutting 20% of its corporate workforce.
Hoeld stressed that Puma has a significant opportunity to better capitalize on its 77-year history, credibility across sports, and breakthrough innovations, but said the changes will take time. He told analysts, “We call the year of 2026, a year of transition. Our absolute goal and our commitment is to grow again as a brand in 2027. We clearly want to accelerate beyond the industry momentum and gain ground again versus competition.”
BrainTrust
Gene Detroyer
Professor, International Business, Guizhou University of Finance & Economics and University of Sanya, China.
Allison McCabe
Director Retail Technology, enVista
Scott Benedict
Founder & CEO, Benedict Enterprises LLC
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Which of the steps being taken will be most critical in helping Puma regain brand relevance?
What are the common missteps brands make when trying to reignite brand heat?
What advice would you have for Puma?
Poll
Loading …
Puma have not controlled their brand well and have been chasing growth in a scattergun way. The result is a tarnished brand that is not cutting through with consumers, especially in a market where overall demand is softer. Rebuilding the brand and injecting more fashionability is critical in the US. Puma is pulling back from discount channels, which will help with this. However, doing more direct selling is only part of the solution. Puma needs to develop a stronger presence in the channels where consumers shop and at key retailers like Dick’s. Unless it does this, it will struggle to register on the consumer radar.
Much like a 12-year old asking “how can I be cool?”, this (brand “heat”) isn’t something you achieve by setting out to do it, it’s the result of having done other things correctly; in this case having products people want, that they know about, and can find readily. So yes, all these steps matter, but without the first, the others have little meaning. There’s nothing inherently wrong with what Puma has outlined – tho something like “reduce bloated inventory” is clearly addressing a result rather than a cause – but it seems to have curiously little to say about the product lines themselves (other than that there are too many of them)
The sneaker business has become incredibly fragmented. That is not just limited to multiple brands and manufacturers, but also within the wearability spectrum. Sneakers are everything from athletic shoes to office shoes. I recently saw a meme in which grateful women praise the trend of sneakers being acceptable in situations where high heels were once the de rigueur.
In a marketplace as fragmented as this, a brand must determine what it wants to be. It can’t be all these things to all people. Shoppers’ brains don’t have room for that.
Puma…what do you want to be? Get that right, and the operational decisions will fall into place.
“Puma…what do you want to be?” Exactly the question running through my head as I read this. Reducing skus without focusing the vision/storytelling will get them nowhere if they are scattering the message.
Among the steps Puma is taking — rationalizing its product range, exiting low-performing wholesale relationships, investing more in direct-to-consumer, and refocusing on core sport categories — the one I see as most critical is re-establishing its brand relevance through storytelling and product design that resonate with its core youthful, style-driven sports-fashion audience. For a brand whose heritage blends performance sport and street-style flair, simply shrinking the assortment or cutting costs isn’t enough: Puma must craft distinctive “hero” pieces and cultural moments that communicate why the brand matters again to the 18-34 consumer who wants credibility, trend-forward style, and purpose.
The common missteps brands make when reigniting “brand heat” include: (1) relying solely on discounts or heavy promotions, which erode margin and brand perception; (2) diluting the core identity with too wide or unfocused a product mix, which confuses the consumer; (3) failing to engage the core demographic emotionally and culturally — e.g., ignoring the street-style, creator-collab or influencer ecosystem that these consumers expect; (4) neglecting seamless omnichannel experience, which means the story doesn’t carry from social to in-store to e-commerce. In Puma’s case, if the restructuring simply means “less product” but not “better story,” the young consumer might ask: “So what’s in it for me?”
My advice to Puma: lean into your heritage of sport-style crossover, spotlight collaborations and limited drops that excite your core demographic (think youth culture, sneakers, creative communities). Align the DTC experience with social content — show the story, not just the logo. Further, ensure the brand doesn’t alienate its fashion-forward loyalists by preserving novelty, design credibility, and regional relevance. If the 18–34 style-savvy athlete or culture-consumer doesn’t feel Puma is making something for them, the reset won’t create heat — it will simply restore function.
I think the most critical step is reconnecting product, storytelling, and brand identity. Puma can streamline SKUs and pull back from discount channels all day long, but unless consumers feel something again…unless they know what the brand stands for…it won’t reignite heat. Getting back to a clear hero product and building cultural relevance around it is where real momentum comes from.
It sounds like Puma has settled on a reasonable laundry list of performance issues.
Pull back from mass merchants and off-price sellers. Check.
Reduce bloated inventories. Check
Significantly reduce product range. Check
Elevate storytelling. Check
Create a halo effect for the entire brand. Check
But that list is not exactly breakthrough stuff. It could be applied to any of a thousand brand or retail makeovers. The article asks but does not answer the key question. What is the key product that the brand stands for…??? Or, where is the differentiation and distinction? What are the market/product/marketing opportunities that Nike, and Addidas, and New balance, and Under Armour, and Asics, and Brooks, and…… aren’t addressing…??? Point being that customers are not currently hurting for choices. Differentiate or call it a day.
By the way, kudos for recognizing that this will be a multi-year project.
Puma’s challenge stems from intense market competition and strategic shortcomings, highlighted by four key factors:
- Competitor Focus: Top rivals like Nike and Adidas maintain premium pricing power by achieving unequivocal clarity in their brand narratives (e.g., Nike’s performance/aspiration, Adidas’s streetwear fusion), contrasting with Puma’s previous blurred, “too commercial” image.
- Scale and Control: Market leaders wield superior financial scale and DTC dominance (40%+ sales), ensuring consistent global brand messaging, while Puma’s lower DTC reliance leaves its brand perception vulnerable to regional wholesale discounting.
- Missing Hero Products: Rivals anchor their brands with unquestionable hero products (icons like Air Jordan or GEL-Kayano) that drive high-margin sales. Puma’s vast product range has diluted its own innovations, preventing any single product from gaining market-defining resonance.
- Consumer Psychology: Consumers choose brands for status and identity, often experiencing choice paralysis when faced with ambiguity. Puma’s lack of clarity causes consumers to gravitate toward the market leaders with the clearest, most trustworthy, and status-enhancing positioning.
Conclusion is that organization must stop chasing fragmented opportunities and instead commit to a focused, cohesive, and deeply supported strategy—making the hard choice to do fewer things, but doing them exceptionally well, from the CEO’s office down to the store floor.
Puma had a favored brand presence in the 1970’s for middle school and high school kids as a sort of niche casual-cool shoe company even as it had sports cache. I don’t know if these results or perceptions ever aligned with what corporate wanted all these years, which was likely a legitimate place in history as leader, as more of an accepted global sportswear brand.
Time to pull out of discount stores and chains to reclaim a place being a smaller player. But smaller doesn’t have to mean irrelevant. Time to innovate in designs, in brand marketing and in sporting partnerships. They don’t have the be the biggest, just decide to be the best, or one of the best at what it does.
More Discussions
How Can Retailers Improve Shoppers’ Sense of Closure When Concerns Emerge?
How can retailers better provide closure and proper resolution to today’s shoppers?NRF 2026 Rewind: Abercrombie’s CEO Shares Leadership Lessons
In a session at the NRF Big Show, Abercrombie & Fitch Co.’s CEO Fran Horowitz shared…Is the Luxury Department Store Facing Extinction?
Are luxury retail stores expected to go the way of the dodo?
Puma have not controlled their brand well and have been chasing growth in a scattergun way. The result is a tarnished brand that is not cutting through with consumers, especially in a market where overall demand is softer. Rebuilding the brand and injecting more fashionability is critical in the US. Puma is pulling back from discount channels, which will help with this. However, doing more direct selling is only part of the solution. Puma needs to develop a stronger presence in the channels where consumers shop and at key retailers like Dick’s. Unless it does this, it will struggle to register on the consumer radar.
Much like a 12-year old asking “how can I be cool?”, this (brand “heat”) isn’t something you achieve by setting out to do it, it’s the result of having done other things correctly; in this case having products people want, that they know about, and can find readily. So yes, all these steps matter, but without the first, the others have little meaning. There’s nothing inherently wrong with what Puma has outlined – tho something like “reduce bloated inventory” is clearly addressing a result rather than a cause – but it seems to have curiously little to say about the product lines themselves (other than that there are too many of them)
The sneaker business has become incredibly fragmented. That is not just limited to multiple brands and manufacturers, but also within the wearability spectrum. Sneakers are everything from athletic shoes to office shoes. I recently saw a meme in which grateful women praise the trend of sneakers being acceptable in situations where high heels were once the de rigueur.
In a marketplace as fragmented as this, a brand must determine what it wants to be. It can’t be all these things to all people. Shoppers’ brains don’t have room for that.
Puma…what do you want to be? Get that right, and the operational decisions will fall into place.
“Puma…what do you want to be?” Exactly the question running through my head as I read this. Reducing skus without focusing the vision/storytelling will get them nowhere if they are scattering the message.
Among the steps Puma is taking — rationalizing its product range, exiting low-performing wholesale relationships, investing more in direct-to-consumer, and refocusing on core sport categories — the one I see as most critical is re-establishing its brand relevance through storytelling and product design that resonate with its core youthful, style-driven sports-fashion audience. For a brand whose heritage blends performance sport and street-style flair, simply shrinking the assortment or cutting costs isn’t enough: Puma must craft distinctive “hero” pieces and cultural moments that communicate why the brand matters again to the 18-34 consumer who wants credibility, trend-forward style, and purpose.
The common missteps brands make when reigniting “brand heat” include: (1) relying solely on discounts or heavy promotions, which erode margin and brand perception; (2) diluting the core identity with too wide or unfocused a product mix, which confuses the consumer; (3) failing to engage the core demographic emotionally and culturally — e.g., ignoring the street-style, creator-collab or influencer ecosystem that these consumers expect; (4) neglecting seamless omnichannel experience, which means the story doesn’t carry from social to in-store to e-commerce. In Puma’s case, if the restructuring simply means “less product” but not “better story,” the young consumer might ask: “So what’s in it for me?”
My advice to Puma: lean into your heritage of sport-style crossover, spotlight collaborations and limited drops that excite your core demographic (think youth culture, sneakers, creative communities). Align the DTC experience with social content — show the story, not just the logo. Further, ensure the brand doesn’t alienate its fashion-forward loyalists by preserving novelty, design credibility, and regional relevance. If the 18–34 style-savvy athlete or culture-consumer doesn’t feel Puma is making something for them, the reset won’t create heat — it will simply restore function.
I think the most critical step is reconnecting product, storytelling, and brand identity. Puma can streamline SKUs and pull back from discount channels all day long, but unless consumers feel something again…unless they know what the brand stands for…it won’t reignite heat. Getting back to a clear hero product and building cultural relevance around it is where real momentum comes from.
It sounds like Puma has settled on a reasonable laundry list of performance issues.
Pull back from mass merchants and off-price sellers. Check.
Reduce bloated inventories. Check
Significantly reduce product range. Check
Elevate storytelling. Check
Create a halo effect for the entire brand. Check
But that list is not exactly breakthrough stuff. It could be applied to any of a thousand brand or retail makeovers. The article asks but does not answer the key question. What is the key product that the brand stands for…??? Or, where is the differentiation and distinction? What are the market/product/marketing opportunities that Nike, and Addidas, and New balance, and Under Armour, and Asics, and Brooks, and…… aren’t addressing…??? Point being that customers are not currently hurting for choices. Differentiate or call it a day.
By the way, kudos for recognizing that this will be a multi-year project.
Puma’s challenge stems from intense market competition and strategic shortcomings, highlighted by four key factors:
Conclusion is that organization must stop chasing fragmented opportunities and instead commit to a focused, cohesive, and deeply supported strategy—making the hard choice to do fewer things, but doing them exceptionally well, from the CEO’s office down to the store floor.
Puma had a favored brand presence in the 1970’s for middle school and high school kids as a sort of niche casual-cool shoe company even as it had sports cache. I don’t know if these results or perceptions ever aligned with what corporate wanted all these years, which was likely a legitimate place in history as leader, as more of an accepted global sportswear brand.
Time to pull out of discount stores and chains to reclaim a place being a smaller player. But smaller doesn’t have to mean irrelevant. Time to innovate in designs, in brand marketing and in sporting partnerships. They don’t have the be the biggest, just decide to be the best, or one of the best at what it does.