Most companies that fall as hard as Billabong simply don’t recover. The debt is too great, the trust has evaporated, and by the time someone devises a solution to bring a brand back from the deep, it’s already lost that what made it a brand. Billabong in 2012 was facing an $860 million loss, a share price that was stubbornly stuck below the 20-cent mark and lenders who weren’t beholden to be patient. The company’s leadership kept changing. The surfers had moved on. But there really was no reason to think this would end well. But it did, and how is worth examining closely, because there was no magic. Just a string of difficult choices by leaders who weren’t afraid to be unpopular.
The Starting Point Was Ugly
This wasn’t a brand dreaming about its future, back in 2013. It was a brand in damage control mode with a crisis that had been years in the making and finally came to fruition.
The company was nearly $350 million in debt, and the creditors were not traditional banks. Other banks decided long ago that Billabong was too risky. The lenders who filled the void were American investment funds, Altamont Capital Partners and Blackstone, and they imposed tough conditions. It was a case of Billabong needing to reach certain financial numbers or else. Everything the company decided to do had to occur within those limits. There wasn’t much opportunity to play around or diversify.
The other dead weight was the store network. Billabong still had more than 400 retail outlets around the world, nearly all of them losing money hand over fist. The issue with stores is that they are not so easy to leave. At each location, there was a signed lease, a legal obligation to continue paying rent regardless of the performance of the store. It also costs money to walk away from a lease. Staying costs money. The company was paying to get stuck. Revenue had already dropped from a peak that hovered close to $1.7 billion annually to a level that couldn’t support the cost of operating a business of this scale. The maths didn’t add up, and everyone in the company knew it.
They Chose Someone Who Had Nothing to Lose
The biggest single decision Billabong made during this time was choosing Neil Fiske as CEO in 2013. Fiske was American. He was previously at Bath and Body Works, a retail chain. He had never worked in surfing. He had no baggage with Billabong, no favourite incarnation of the brand to return to and no old relationships at the company to defend. And that was the very reason he was the right guy.
It is awkward for people who have been in a failing system for so long, they are still attached emotionally to things that must disappear. Fiske had none of that. He was able to see the business as it existed instead of how it once was or how people hoped it would be. His conclusion was not complicated. Billabong had pretty much spent years being a bit of everything to everyone and as a result none too popular with anyone. More specifically, it had become nothing to surfers, the one group it absolutely could not afford to lose.
His feeling was that the way back was not a new advertising campaign or repositioning strategy or design refresh. It was more complicated, and simpler, than any of that. The company was forced to return to making things that actual surfers wanted, and it had to stop doing everything else. That included getting rid of what didn’t belong, shutting down what wasn’t working and being patient enough to build up through a grassroots process.
It Was Still the Right Decision to Sell at a Loss
From 2013 to 2015, Billabong sold off most of what it had purchased in the years of expansion, and it sold much of it at great loss.
The watch brand Nixon was purchased for approximately $74 million in 2006. In 2014, it was sold for about $16 million. Which is almost $58 million lost. Dakine, a bags and outdoor gear brand that sold for $70 million; it also took a hit. So, string of retail chains were sold that had been acquired during the spending decade, sold for less than what was paid, losses written off and moved along.
| What Was Sold | Original Cost | Sale Price | Loss |
| Nixon — watches | ~$74 million | ~$16 million | ~$58 million |
| Dakine — bags and gear | ~$70 million | Undisclosed | Very large |
| Various retail chains | Hundreds of millions |
These numbers are dismal purely from an accounting standpoint. But accounting wasn’t the point. The theory, using the surfing experience as an extended metaphor: Every brand and business that sold meant something got taken off the plate (less debt, less distraction, less management time spent not related to surfing). Any money that came in went directly to paying down the debt. By 2015, the debt had improved enough that the company could start making decisions based on what was good for the brand, rather than what would keep lenders from getting jumpy.
Meanwhile, stores were closing at a breakneck pace. Those closures each had real costs attached, lease break fees, staff redundancies, and clearing out whatever stock remained. None of it was cheap. But any closed store also eliminates a fixed ongoing loss to the business. Gradually, as one store after another dropped off the books, the company began to get lighter.
The Product Must Actually Be Good Again
Sorting out the finances bought time. But time, by itself, does not revive a brand. The only thing that really brings a brand back is causing people to want it again, and the only way to make people want Billabong again was by making things worth wanting.
The brand had diluted itself with so many products and retail touch points during its expansion years that it had become everyday. It was in shopping malls and department stores. Surfers, those who spent time in the water and cared about the sport, had noticed and quietly retreated. By the time the company realised this, the damage was already years in.
Fixing it meant revisiting the starting line in a very literal sense. Billabong rebuilt its athlete sponsorship program, re-signing professional surfers with something approaching real credibility in the sport. It wasn’t about celebrity or social media reach. It was also sending a signal to a certain community that the brand was serious about surfing again. That community is small, sure, but it’s the one that drives everyone else.
The product offering was significantly reduced. Fewer products, better quality, more emphasis on what surfers actually needed. The swimwear category was labelled a priority, it made more appealing margins than that of most other products, and it was an area where the product quality should really appeal to the customer. Higher quality equalled higher prices, and higher prices resulted in better profit per item sold, despite the total number of items sold still recovering.
Online Changed the Financial Logic
One of the more consequential changes of that era was pushing the business toward selling directly to customers online instead of depending on wholesale relationships with third-party retailers.
When Billabong sold through a department store or big retail chain, that retailer took somewhere between 40 and 50 cents of every dollar a customer spent. That money paid the retailer for shelf space and traffic. As Billabong shut its own stores and cut down on wholesaling, it rebuilt its direct-to-consumer online channels, its own website, and its own digital storefronts, and the financial impact was substantial. To sell directly also meant to retain the full margin on each sale.
The publicity and content that accompanied this effort were not advertising. This was surf content, genuine athletes, real waves, honest competition. The sort of material surfers actually want to watch and share. It was inexpensive to produce compared to television advertising, and it spoke directly to the audience the brand needed, without touting a sales pitch. People do not share advertisements. Their members share things they think are interesting. Billabong did interesting things again.
Boardriders Bought What Remained, and It Was Plenty
Billabong was acquired in 2018 by Boardriders Inc., the parent company of Quiksilver, for about $383 million. That number is sobering, compared to the nearly $4 billion the company was worth at its peak. But relative to where the company found itself in 2012, with analysts openly raising doubts about whether it would survive, $383 million is a real rebound.
Boardriders got a very clean brand with real equity in the surf market, global wholesale relationships that had been tightly maintained and a growing direct-to-consumer operation. Billabong received financial strength, a common infrastructure it no longer had to fund alone and a parent company that got the industry in which it was competing. The new entity, which also encompassed Roxy and RVCA, became the world’s largest surf clothing operation by revenue.
Billabong was no longer an independent business listed on the Australian stock exchange. But the brand was alive. The products were selling. The surfers had come back.
What the Recovery Actually Shows
Billabong today is not a business in pursuit of scale. It sells through surf shops, its own online store and a more limited selection of retailers that better represent the brand. It is profitable. It is scaling in the segments that count. It has recaptured the seriousness of purpose it was always intended to serve.
The rebound wasn’t a clever idea or a turning point. It was the product of years of silently doing the right things, selling at a loss when selling was right, shutting stores when shutting was right, making better products when cutting costs seemed like the only way to go and keeping the faith when keeping faith meant going against popular sentiment.
Follow Inspirepreneur Magazine for more such business success stories.
