Getting the Core and Fashion Colour Split Wrong

Colour choice and colour depth are different decisions

A range can contain the right fashion colour and still buy too much of it. The creative decision concerns the customer proposition; the quantity decision concerns the selling opportunity and what the business can afford to retain afterwards. Neither is settled by counting the swatches.

Core’s Range Plan Workspace brings colour descriptions, planned unit quantities, landed unit cost and total landed cost into the product review. Those fields let the buyer relate a palette choice to a stock commitment. The buyer still defines each colour’s role; the screen does not establish an automatic core-versus-fashion classification.

Set the split for the category rather than the whole brand

A neutral-heavy trouser range and a colour-led accessory range need not share one buying ratio. Compare customer use, continuity, price and availability within a relevant category. Last season’s fashion-colour sales can reflect limited availability or a promotion rather than unconstrained preference.

Use the selected trading evidence to challenge the Core option plan, then retain the assumption behind the revision. The product connection is the range and budget decision; this article does not claim that Core automatically classifies every colour or chooses a universal optimal split.

Test two mixes without changing the buying envelope

The animation’s Everyday crew has two example colour options: Midnight for the core role and Rosewood for the fashion test. Assume 500 knitwear units at a common $20 landed unit cost, giving a $10,000 envelope. The initial 300/200 split costs $6,000/$4,000; the proposed 350/150 split costs $7,000/$3,000. Total quantity and cost stay unchanged.

The revised demand assumption is 330 core and 120 fashion units for the window. The initial core quantity is thirty below that requirement while fashion exceeds its requirement by eighty. The proposed mix covers those assumed sales and leaves twenty core and thirty fashion units, fifty overall.

Keep the mix correction separate from a sales guarantee

The example moves fifty planned units from fashion to core without changing total cost. It does not assume every removed fashion purchase transfers to a core colour. The independent demand assumptions must be supported by availability-aware evidence, not invented to justify a preferred palette.

In Core, compare the original and revised range with the same period, cost and buying status. If quantities are already ordered, a different planned split is not a supplier amendment. Confirm what can still change before representing the new colour balance as committed supply.

A useful sensitivity challenges the core demand assumption itself. If expected core demand were 10% below 330, it would be 297. The proposed core quantity would then leave 53, rather than twenty. The colour split should therefore be judged against a range of plausible demand, not only the exact forecast that makes it look attractive.

Choose a review point while the colour test is useful

A limited colour test needs enough relevant exposure to teach the buyer something. Set a review point before a repeat would arrive too late. Compare selling against the quantity available and the intended customer, rather than use a category total to conceal weak individual colour evidence.

Core’s forward plan keeps the remaining demand and intake window visible. A smaller opening fashion commitment may preserve flexibility, but this illustration does not calculate a guaranteed benefit from that flexibility. A repeat still needs an acceptable cost, usable date and authorised buying capacity.

Plan what happens to the retained colour stock

A fashion colour can remain commercially useful after the initial window, or it can require an exit route. State which assumption applies before approving the depth. The thirty proposed remaining fashion units are a planned closing balance, not evidence that they must be marked down.

Connect that retained quantity with the later MFP/WSSI period. Do not erase it when the next colour story begins. A range can appear fresh while accumulating small leftovers from every launch; the next buying decision should start with the stock already owned and its likely use.

Keep the evidence at style-colour level where practical. A fashion colour can look strong in the category average because another style received the best placement or earlier stock. Ask what would change the next commitment: a repeatable selling rate, a different local mix or a confirmed supplier opportunity before the review window closes.

Approve a reasoned split, not a fixed rule

For the worked range, 350 core and 150 fashion units is a proposal for one category, period and demand basis. Its twenty/thirty closing balance deserves review alongside sizes and arrival timing. Another category may justify a different mix without being less disciplined.

Merchmix Core connects the creative choice to the quantities and financial consequence. Keep the palette interesting, protect the depth customers repeatedly need, and retain the evidence behind the boundary between the two. A successful split is explainable at option level, not merely attractive as a percentage.

Common questions