
Unilever's Dr. Squatch Acquisition Faces Three Critical Challenges
Unilever announced the acquisition of men's grooming brand Dr. Squatch for an undisclosed sum, specifically citing the brand's "viral, social-first marketing strategies, partnerships with influencers and celebrities, and culturally relevant collaborations" as key deal drivers. Known for cheeky marketing and provocative campaigns featuring Sydney Sweeney as a "Body Wash Genie" Dr. Squatch has built a loyal following among Gen Z men whose facial skincare usage surged from 42% to 68% between 2022 and '24 according to research by Mintel.
Yet Unilever has been here before, without reaping the rewards. The corporate giant acquired Dollar Shave Club (DSC) in 2016 for what seems almost identical reasons—viral marketing that challenged industry giants. Seven years later, Unilever confessed the expected returns hadn't materialized and sold the company to private equity. DSC's former CEO Larry Bodner was blunt about the failure: Unilever "neutered the vibe and fun of what the brand stood for. It just didn't fit in a vanilla corporate entity."
With Dr. Squatch facing increasing competition from disruptive brands like Manscaped and Harry's, Unilever can't afford another costly misstep. Success depends on Unilever learning three critical lessons from the DSC acquisition to preserve what made Dr. Squatch worth acquiring.
The Corporate Acquisition Curse
The soul of a startup starts with a higher brand purpose.
A review of corporate acquisitions of entrepreneurial brands reveals a consistent pattern: start-up brands that thrive on agility, risk-taking, and innovative culture typically struggle when absorbed into corporate structures that prioritize process, hierarchy, and risk management.
Drawing on Ranjay Gulati's insightful research on the soul of a start-up, three crucial cultural pillars define successful startups:
When acquirers maintain these pillars, they more often succeed. When corporate processes eclipse the culture, ventures almost inevitably falter. Yet preserving start-ups' cultural pillars can be challenging for corporate entities.
Corporations who succeed in preserving the acquired brand's higher purpose do so by making that part of the deal. Google's $1.65 billion YouTube acquisition worked because Google explicitly promised YouTube would "operate independently to preserve its successful brand and passionate community." Similarly, P&G acquired Native body care to fill a specific portfolio gap in natural/clean deodorants. The deal helped "P&G to reach consumers who are looking to avoid certain ingredients". Rather than changing Native's mission, P&G leveraged it to reach health-conscious consumers.
Ben and Jerry's was acquired by Unilever in April 2000 for $326 million after more than 20 years as ... More an independent enterprise.
Yet, supporting an entrepreneurial brand's higher purpose can come with challenges, especially when the founder's purpose takes a new direction. Unilever has experienced this reality firsthand with its Ben & Jerry's ice cream co-founders. The founder's increasing social activism has not consistently aligned with Unilever's values, illustrating the complexity corporations can face.
Entrepreneurial brands often succeed by creating intimate customer relationships that corporations desperately desire, but which their formal structures and scale can hinder. Nordstrom's $350 million acquisition of Trunk Club in 2014 illustrates this challenge. Trunk Club revolutionized personal styling for affluent men through high-touch, personalized service—customers developed relationships with individual stylists who understood their preferences.
After the acquisition, Nordstrom pushed to expand the service yet to contain costs, instituted a $25 at-home try-on fee and shortened the return window, negatively impacting what male customers had come to expect. The result: Nordstrom took a $197 million write-down and eventually shut down the service entirely.
Snapple built its success on anti-establishment marketing and selling through small, independent ... More distributors.
Quaker Oats' experience with its Snapple acquisition in 1994 demonstrates how challenging it can be to preserve autonomy within corporate decision-making. When Quaker acquired the quirky beverage brand for $1.7 billion, Snapple had built its success on unconventional marketing and distribution through small, independent distributors that matched its authentic, anti-establishment brand identity.
However, Quaker applied its traditional corporate playbook, pushing Snapple into supermarkets where it faced direct competition from giants like Coca-Cola and lost the very quirkiness that made it valuable. Three years later, Quaker sold Snapple for just $300 million.
Three Lessons Unilever Can Learn from the Dollar Shave Club Experiment
The global men's personal care market is projected to grow at 11% annually through 2032
Unilever's reasons for acquiring Dr. Squatch mirrors the rationale for acquiring Dollar Shave Club: cheeky, irreverent marketing that disrupts traditional grooming advertising and connects with male audiences. The DSC experiment offers three essential lessons Unilever would be wise to apply to maintain Dr Squatch's cultural pillars and appeal.
DSC rebelled against large corporations by offering affordable razors and challenging the high price of established brands, namely Gillette. DSC's popularity ignited with an expletive-laden video that challenged industry conventions. Integrating DSC into a broader corporate purpose not surprisingly diluted the brand's appeal.
Dr. Squatch's brand purpose follows a similar ethos and goes beyond selling soap. The brand's limited-edition soap using Ms. Sweeney's bathwater reflects a purpose that rejects mainstream personal care products for a more authentic approach to masculinity.
For Dr. Squatch to succeed will require the brand stay true to its purpose and ability to create campaigns that generate organic social media buzz—the kind of awareness that motivated Unilever's purchase in the first place.
When DSC expanded beyond its core $1 razor proposition into expensive cologne, hair cream, and sunscreen, it abandoned the budget-conscious customers who had embraced the brand's anti-establishment message about overpriced grooming products. Considering Dr Squatch's popularity, Gen Z men have shown they respond to messaging around grooming as self-expression rather than simply basic hygiene.
Gen Z men respond to marketing messaging around grooming as self-expression not simply as basic ... More hygiene.
Gen Z men represent the future of the men's grooming market according to researcher Mintel. Unilever would do well to keep the interests and preferences of this demographic front and center as they invest in Dr Squatch and avoid the temptation to push the brand too quickly into mass-market price points where it could lose the authenticity that has resonated so strongly with Gen Z men.
Unilever attempted to preserve creative independence by allowing DSC to launch MEL Magazine —a men's lifestyle publication with complete editorial independence and no revenue model, bankrolled entirely by Unilever. While this effort preserved autonomy, it exemplified too much creative freedom without accountability.
The challenge for Unilever with Dr. Squatch is finding the optimal balance between creative autonomy and business accountability. Success means establishing clear KPIs around brand engagement, customer acquisition costs, and revenue growth while giving the Dr. Squatch team the freedom to pursue unconventional marketing strategies that drive those metrics.
Dollar Shave Club's Lessons Provide a Roadmap for Dr. Squatch's Success
The global men's personal care market generated $58 billion in 2022 and is projected to grow at 11% annually through 2032. The Dr. Squatch opportunity requires not only capturing the coveted GenZ men and their surging interest in skincare but continuing to connect with young men who view grooming as self-expression and respond to authentic, irreverent messaging.
Unilever now has a roadmap for success with Dr Squatch based on its struggles with Dollar Shave Club: maintain brand purpose while delivering returns, protect customer connections while enabling growth, preserve creative autonomy without sacrificing accountability.
The question isn't whether Dr. Squatch has the potential to succeed under Unilever's ownership—it's whether Unilever has learned from its past efforts to let the brand flourish.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Elizabeth Warren Says Elon Musk's SpaceX Is Paying Less Tax Than You But Getting 'Billions' From The Government: Trump And GOP 'Rigged' The Tax Code
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) has accused Elon Musk's SpaceX of benefiting from billions in U.S. government contracts while paying little to no federal taxes. Warren Accuses Musk Of Dodging Taxes On Monday, Warren took to X, formerly Twitter, and said that "Elon Musk's SpaceX is worth over $350 BILLION – after receiving billions in government contracts – but could be paying LESS in taxes than you." She blamed Donald Trump's tax reforms, saying Republicans "rigged the tax code with loopholes for billionaire corporations" and demanded "no more corporate handouts." Trending: The same firms that backed Uber, Venmo and eBay are investing in this pre-IPO company disrupting a $1.8T market — Her remarks followed a New York Times report that SpaceX has avoided paying federal income tax on about $5 billion in taxable income since its founding in 2002 by using a legal tax strategy known as a net operating loss carryforward. The provision, expanded indefinitely under Trump in 2017, lets companies offset future income with earlier losses. Musk Previously Defended Tesla's Tax Strategy Musk currently has a net worth of $375 billion, according to Bloomberg's Billionaire Index, making him the wealthiest individual on Earth. In February earlier this year, Musk and Tesla Inc. (NASDAQ:TSLA) VP of Finance Sendil Palani denied claims that Tesla evaded taxes, saying that the company legally carried forward past losses under IRS provisions. At the time, Musk acknowledged Tesla didn't pay U.S. federal income tax for several years, including 2024, since most profits come from overseas sales, but highlighted the need for comprehensive tax reform to address excessive Revenue Soars, Taxes Stay Low Documents reviewed by the publication show that more than 75% of SpaceX's revenue in 2020 and 2021 came from federal contracts. Despite that reliance on taxpayers, SpaceX paid only minimal taxes — including $483,000 to foreign governments and $78,000 in state taxes in 2021. SpaceX's business is also booming. Revenue is expected to reach $15.5 billion in 2025, double the $7.4 billion reported in 2023. Starlink, its satellite internet service, now generates more revenue than its rocket division, with 2.5 million users and $8 billion in 2023 sales. Warren Broadens Criticism Of Musk Warren has previously also targeted Musk over what she describes as conflicts of interest and misuse of government influence. In June, her office released a report titled "130 Days of Elon Musk," alleging more than 100 abuses of power during his time as a Trump administration adviser. She has also criticized the Pentagon for awarding Musk's AI startup xAI a $200 million contract just days after its chatbot Grok was caught making antisemitic remarks. Read Next: 'Scrolling To UBI' — Deloitte's #1 fastest-growing software company allows users to earn money on their phones. You can invest today for just $0.30/share. Bezos' Favorite Real Estate Platform Launches A Way To Ride The Ongoing Private Credit Boom Photo Courtesy: Sheila Fitzgerald On UNLOCKED: 5 NEW TRADES EVERY WEEK. Click now to get top trade ideas daily, plus unlimited access to cutting-edge tools and strategies to gain an edge in the markets. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? This article Elizabeth Warren Says Elon Musk's SpaceX Is Paying Less Tax Than You But Getting 'Billions' From The Government: Trump And GOP 'Rigged' The Tax Code originally appeared on Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
2 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Better Quantum Computing Stock: D-Wave Quantum vs. Quantum Computing Inc.
Key Points Quantum computing offer an intriguing opportunity given its potential to revolutionize many industries. D-Wave Quantum and Quantum Computing Inc. are early-stage businesses with promising innovations. However, both companies are seeing volatile sales across quarters, and neither is profitable. 10 stocks we like better than D-Wave Quantum › The quantum computing sector offers an exciting new area to invest in. Quantum machines can perform sophisticated calculations beyond the capabilities of current classical computers. This tech could transform industries such as medicine and artificial intelligence. But among the bevy of businesses in the field, which are worthwhile long-term investments as the nascent industry grows? Two to consider are D-Wave Quantum (NYSE: QBTS) and Quantum Computing Inc. (NASDAQ: QUBT), which also refers to itself as QCi. Between D-Wave and QCi, one looks like the better quantum computing stock. Read on for an exploration of both businesses to understand which one and why. Untangling D-Wave Quantum's business performance D-Wave produces income primarily through subscriptions to its quantum systems via the cloud and professional services to support customers in the use of its technology. In 2025, D-Wave's sales have been on a roller coaster. It generated $15 million in the first quarter after selling one of its quantum computers. In Q2, revenue was $3.1 million, a 42% increase from 2024's $2.2 million as the company picked up $1 million to upgrade the device sold in the first quarter. This sales volatility could continue for some time as D-Wave grows its business. An encouraging sign is 92% year-over-year growth in its Q2 bookings to $1.3 million. Bookings represent customer orders received in the quarter that are expected to produce revenue when the orders are fulfilled. However, D-Wave isn't turning a profit. Its Q2 operating loss of $26.5 million was a 42% increase from the previous year. That's a concerning trend given its Q2 revenue of just $3.1 million. Fortunately, D-Wave has stockpiled a record high $819.3 million in cash and equivalents on its balance sheet. It exited Q2 with total assets of $843.6 million versus total liabilities of $149.3 million. This enables the company to maintain operations in the short term on its path to revenue growth. Quantum Computing Inc.'s budding business QCi uses light particles, called photons, to perform calculations in its quantum computer chips. It sells these chips, other hardware, and professional services to generate revenue. The company is in an early stage of its business lifecycle with sales coming primarily from research grants and proof-of-concept projects. As a result, its sales are small, and prone to substantial swings. For example, in 2024, QCi generated revenue of $373,000, a 4% year-over-year increase. But through the first half of 2025, sales plunged 52% to $100,000. QCi's technology has the potential to generate long-term revenue growth. Photons can be used in a wide range of light sensing, imaging, and other optical applications. Nevertheless, until QCi can gain traction with a larger group of customers, sales will continue to struggle. And that does not bode well for its business viability, because the company is not profitable. The company exited Q2 with an operating loss of $10.2 million against revenue of $61,000 as research and development costs more than doubled year over year to $6 million. QCi's saving grace is that, like D-Wave, it amassed a large war chest to fund operations in the short term. Q2 total assets were $426.1 million with cash and equivalents of $348.8 million. Total liabilities in the quarter were $30.1 million. Deciding between D-Wave Quantum and Quantum Computing Inc. In choosing between D-Wave Quantum or QCi, an important consideration is share price valuation. Since both are not profitable, the way to get at this is using the price-to-sales (P/S) ratio, which measures how much investors are willing to pay for every dollar of revenue generated over the trailing 12 months. The chart shows QCi's P/S multiple is far above D-Wave's, and the disparity is so great, QCi shares look overpriced. Consequently, D-Wave stock is the better value. This, combined with promising sales and bookings growth, makes D-Wave a more attractive investment than its rival. At QCi's current phase of development, it's a highly speculative stock given the low revenue, high costs, and limited commercial sales. This doesn't mean D-Wave shares are a bargain, since its sales multiple is quite high as well. Another factor to consider is that the quantum computing industry is in its early stages. Quantum computers are prone to calculation errors, because the atomic particles in these machines are sensitive to the slightest environmental disturbances, such as a minor temperature change. So while D-Wave is the better choice versus QCi, any investment in a pure-play quantum computer company is a risk. And it could take years before a scalable quantum device is possible. Some estimates predict that won't happen until 2040. Given these factors, only investors with a high risk tolerance should consider investing in D-Wave. Should you invest $1,000 in D-Wave Quantum right now? Before you buy stock in D-Wave Quantum, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and D-Wave Quantum wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $671,466!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,115,633!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,077% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 185% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of August 18, 2025 Robert Izquierdo has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Better Quantum Computing Stock: D-Wave Quantum vs. Quantum Computing Inc. was originally published by The Motley Fool
Yahoo
2 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Lowe's to buy Foundation Building Materials for $8.8 billion to boost contractor business
(Reuters) -Lowe's Cos said on Wednesday it has agreed to buy interior building products distributor Foundation Building Materials for nearly $8.8 billion, stepping up its expansion into the professional builder market. Shares of the home improvement chain rose 4.3% in premarket trading as the company also beat second-quarter profit estimates. Lowe's and rival Home Depot are leaning on deals to bolster their businesses that serve contractors and builders, a key growth area, amid softness in the do-it-yourself segment. Lowe's acquired Artisan Design for $1.33 billion in April, while Home Depot in late June decided to buy specialty building products distributor GMS for about $4.3 billion. The company raised its total annual sales forecast to a range of $84.5 billion to $85.5 billion, compared to its prior expectation of $83.5 to $84.5 billion. It earned $4.33 per share on an adjusted basis in the quarter, exceeding estimates of $4.24, according to data compiled by LSEG. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data