They actually achieved the $677M with an apparently larger...

They actually achieved the $677M with an apparently larger corporate daigou contribution than I had anticipated.

Everyone focuses so much on daigou, because it is such a distinctive and polarising feature of the business and the industry as whole. But the real issue is the slowdown in CBEC sales ( - 36% in 1H21 vs. 1H20) which was a similar magnitude decline as the ANZ IF segment.

I said prior to 1H21 that even with no improvement in daigou or CBEC sales, they could meet FY20 revenue guidance. But this would always have placed them at the lower end of the range, and also assumed that the slowdown was more heavily weighted towards daigou rather than CBEC, whereas now it appears to be evenly split. It is an "English label" problem, stemming from inventory issues, spanning multiple channels.

They have more levers to pull in terms of incentivisation and cooperation with corporate daigou than they do in the social e-commerce space, where the product is sold across a range of platforms, including those which the company endorses and wants to be on, but also platforms where it has less of a say and less control over its pricing etc.

So I think the adjusted guidance and language (though it doesn't say this directly) reflects the greater uncertainty resulting from this. Sales through corporate daigou could improve, for instance, but there could (not definitely, but a harder to quantify risk) be some lag or further decline in CBEC sales on certain platforms counteracting this.

My expectation / hope is that resolving English label inventory issues and improving traceability will be the final steps needed to resolve this, that they will have a positive ripple effect across these channels. But this won't happen overnight.