This is an analysis taken from our Company Database, which we have copied out and pasted here for public view.  The Company Database collects different qualitative and quantitative data points on companies and includes Basecamp InQb8r member and non-member companies.  The purpose of the database is to allow Basecamp InQb8r members to learn from companies in the database to follow and model in their own company.

Company Name: Asket

Address: Stockholm, Sweden


Projected/Actual/Estimated: Estimated

Company Status: Scale Stage

Product Description: men’s apparel

Product Categories: Apparel and Personal Accessories

Product Sub-category:

Date Started: 01/01/2015

Patents: None seen based on quick search

Unique Selling Proposition/WOW Factors:

  • Many sizes for t-shirts.
  • Full visibility into supply chain, production and logistics of each garmet
    Ethical manufacturing

Distribution Channels: Direct

Distribution Categories:

Number of Distribution Points:

Distribution Companies:

Marketing Strategies and Channels:

  • Organic keywords
  • Digital advertising
  • Independent reviews: YouTube videos with many reviews that drives visits to website
  • PR
  • Ad copy – none really that is interesting or sales/conversion driven
  • Value propositions – nice job of ethical manufacturing tracing on each product page
  • Top messages – see Unique Selling Proposition/WOW Factors
  • Call to actions – none
  • Demographics/target customer – higher end
  • Offers – none
  • Landing Pages/Funnel – no sales funnel with upsell/downsels detected. AOV probably higher than benchmark $75 for DTC operations. No free shipping option detected for U.S. market.

Customer Retention Strategies: From what could be observed without ordering products: Email

Resource Sustainability Strategies: Ethical manufacturing all the way from farm, through production, although there are many steps in manufacturing done by different partners around the world, so logistics/carbon footprint is probably large.


  • Companies ethical/transparent supply chain/manufacturing is being adopted by all leading brands in fashion, so this advantage may be going away
  • Multi-sizing of products is not hard to copy.
  • Multi-sizing adds to SKU proliferation and cash flow tied up in inventory.
  • Not really anything to differentiate the brand – story/background or website.
  • Appears to sell direct only and not in retail or through resellers, which adds to risk without omnichannel distribution.

Average SRP $: $175.00

Gross Revenue: $2,700,000.00

Gross Revenue Range: $2,000,000-$9,999,999

Returns %: 10.00%

Cost of Goods Sold (COGS) %: 25.00%

Marketing %: 5.00%

Return on as spend (ROAS): 20.00

Sales/Tradespend %:

Operations %: 50.00%


Customer Lifetime Value $:

Customer Acquisition Cost $:

Repurchase Rate %: 50.00%

Units Sold Per Week:

Monthly Growth Rate %:

Full-time Employees (Equivalent): 5

Funding Raised $:

Funding Structure: Seed funding indicated only. Original kickstarter success in 2015




Monthly Burn Rate: $200,000

Additional Information/Notes

  • 100K site visits/month at conversion of 1% for 1000/orders per month at $225 avg order value estimate. Marketing looks to be mostly organic/WOM/repeat purchasing, so estimated low. Operations estimated at 50% based on 5 employees and associated expenses.

Future Potential:

  • Company active for 4-years without appears to be external funding, so it may be sustainable and sustaining on its own with positive EBITDA.
    No defensible competitive advantage other than possibly customer loyalty with quality products, so it could be in a fragile state to competitive forces, unless it can differentiate further (story, products, patents/IP, distribution channels).
  • High quality products targeting a higher earning/luxury customer demographic, so more insulated from disruption than if selling middle-market and/or low-quality/low priced.
  • Ethical manufacturing is on-point for current trends.
  • Appears to only sell direct, which is good from a customer relationship level and maximizes its financial gain without intermediaries, but is subject to competitive pressures if it is not able to expand distribution to resellers who can offer more revenue sources and balance.

Summary: sustaining, but fragile, and has a track record that appears to be working, with a business model that I think works and is on-point for trends, but it has to differentiate further (story, products, patents/IP, distribution channels) so it is less fragile. I think it has a good shot at future success if it can differentiate more.