Aside from the universal challenges of running a small business—HR, finance, and operations—distribution is often the most contentious and stressful issue we face as sales representatives and agencies.
The Pie
Every distribution decision involves multiple stakeholders, each with their own incentives, pressures, and sometimes competing values. In an ideal world, everyone would agree that new distribution should “grow the pie.” In reality, the math rarely works out perfectly. One plus one might equal 1.5—but if it trends toward two over time, that’s still progress. Sometimes the pie can actually grow for all with increased brand awareness, but yes, often existing dealers feel some impact when new doors open.
I’d estimate that 99% of the time, the risk existing dealers perceive is overblown. However, I understand—retail is challenging, and we’re all trying to keep our businesses thriving.
Three Way
The most obvious stakeholders are the vendor and the retailer. However, vendors often rely on their representative—the person on the ground with intimate market knowledge and an understanding of brand values—to make the call. This means the rep assumes both the responsibility and the risk of recommending or declining new distribution.
What appears to be a simple vendor-dealer relationship is actually a complex arrangement involving a vendor, a representative/agency, and a dealer. In reality, there are often multiple existing dealers weighing in, each feeling stressed about the potential impact.
Yer Rep
For a sales rep, reputation is everything. We serve our dealers first, then our vendors. Vendor partnerships may evolve over time, but with aligned values, we should agree on most major decisions. We’re expected to run sound businesses, be authentic users of the products we represent, share knowledge with the community, and provide guidance that leads to mutual success. This includes sharing insights and facts about the opportunities and risks around new distribution. Our dealers are our lifeblood. These relationships must endure for the life of the agency and beyond. But no relationship survives without conflict.
Conflict most often arises on the dealer side when a shop is eager to carry a brand, but lacks the differentiation, commitment, location, expertise, or vision to truly grow the market. On the other side sits an existing dealer who feels they’re already serving the territory and questions why we’d consider a new partner. We may see them as offering a difference in the sports they serve, the products they assort, and their approach to business, or simply a location that serves a market that others do not.
Paradox
It’s truly a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” scenario.
Expand distribution, and existing dealers push back. Decline, and the prospective dealer walks away frustrated. Then there are existing dealers expanding into new markets who assume the brand will expand with them. We’d love that—but sometimes the market simply doesn’t support it. Sometimes, they don’t even ask before signing a lease, and then they’re upset when we decline to expand with them.
To provide context: our agency represents nine brands and manages over 400 retailer relationships across Western Canada. Fewer than ten of those retail partners carry all nine of our brands. We continually seek opportunities to expand our mix with our partners, but only when the fit is right.
We don’t say yes to everyone. Not everyone says yes to us. We have to accept this. Getting into business requires at least three parties—vendor, rep, and dealer—to all feel the opportunity is right.
I share this because it’s the often-misunderstood reality of our business. Reps live in the middle ground between growth and protection, constantly balancing what’s best for the vendor, the dealer, and the market. We strive to please everyone, but ultimately, we make the best decisions that we feel are right for all parties involved.
That’s the job. And it’s rarely easy.
More and Less 