I can't say as much as I'd like to because of time constraints, but I was talking about this with someone just today.

I was looking at Disney, Lululemon, and Nike separately. Not everything you said is mutually exclusive. I see several problems

* the internet, for all its problems, has made it easier for people to share bad experience when a company producing a branded product decides to make its quality worse
* the internet, as one of its problems, promotes group or cliquish behavior
* companies are trying to retain short term margins in the face of a weaker dollar and a wages that have stagnated for too long and are bouncing back
* company management short-term thinking has gotten worse for 50 years

Lululemon, in my opinion, is the worst. They betrayed their core buyer, which was a luxury buyer. They did it long enough and blatently enough that their brand went from a premium asset to an anchor. I have no idea how they get out of it. Apple is the only company I can think of that did it and I do not see a LULU Steve Jobs figure. Imagine, for example, if Rolls Royce replaced the wood panels and Spirit of Ecstasy figure with plastic to save $1000 per car. Could they ever recover their reputation?

Nike is similar, but as others have noted it's just a series of poor marketing decisions and self-inflicted execution injuries. I also don't want to catch that falling knife. They are not cool any more. But their products are still as good as they were before, particularly in athletic wear (more than shoes). It will take them money and time to recover what they've lost to Hoka, Brooks, and others - if they can.

Disney is another. I had the conversation because of the Character.AI CTO news. Eisner made the same mistake Buffett did. When Eisner came back, he had one job and one job only, which was succession planning. Time will tell if he did it well. But the goodwill and nostalgia of Disney movies over generations has a tail value reflected in the high valuation and extortionist park prices. Losing that goodwill with short term thinking by the new management could make them a $40 stock. I think they are in a better position that fashion brands at least.

I don't think consumer brands are dead, but if they can't differentiate themselves over time with better quality than dupes on Temu, then they deserve what they get. They are not brands, they are product companies, and their short sighted and weak leadership has allowed themselves the mistake of inverting this relationship.