Thus, it was forecasted that the Zara's store in Melbourne that attracts wealthy demographic including Apple might not lead to customer traffic because of weak retail environment of the store (Stafford, 2011). .
Retailers have continued to put additional stress on designers and manufacturers for lower priced items. In Melbourne, Zara's competitors for the most part, have followed the trends to source product development and materials to cheaper foreign partners (Hildegunn 2006). While there is a substantial cost advantage to be gained, particularly in manufacturing through outsourcing, the effect on lead-times is severe (Car, Gallie & Corre, 2010). It is not distance that causes replacement the times of lead to lengthen in global sourcing but the delays and variables source by internal development at chain ends. The net result is longer ˜pipelines' with more inventories and the ever present risk of obsolescence. Same time, there have been go by many traders to significantly reduce the number of suppliers with whom they do business (Torun, 2007). This supply-base rationalization has been driven primarily by the need to develop receptive replacement systems. This is almost impossible when sourcing is spread in hundreds, if not thousands suppliers (Capell, Kamenev & Saminather, 2006). .
Zara has three closest and strongest competitors, which are GAP, H &M and Benetton. They have a narrower vertical scope than Zara. Because Zara owns much production and stores that is advantageous when adapting to demand quickly (Carmen, 2009). GAP and H&M own their stores but outsource production. The GAP was doing quite well in the 80's and 90's, with their stance of unpretentious clothes. However, their inability to expand internationally was due to pricing pressures, sizing discrepancies and unusually long supply chains (Masa & Zara, 2001). This did not allow them to compete in the fast fashion industry, they were crushed by an overabundance of unsold inventory.
