Executive Director Anupam Bansal backs physical stores, flags rising platform costs, and targets Tier 2 cities as the brand’s next growth frontier
Liberty Shoes, one of India’s legacy footwear brands, is firmly backing physical retail over ecommerce, targeting an 80:20 split in favour of stores. This comes even as digital platforms grow increasingly cost-heavy for brands, driven by rising marketing spends on platforms such as Amazon and Meta, which the company says do not deliver proportionate returns.
In an interaction with BW Retail World, the company’s top executive said retail currently remains more profitable than online, while cautioning that quick commerce models in footwear risk creating unsustainable consumer expectations. The company is also prioritising Tier 2 cities and mini metros as its key growth markets, where evolving consumers still display a strong affinity for established Indian brands.
With black and brown formal footwear contributing 40 per cent of revenues, F-leisure at 20 per cent, and the remainder split between women’s and kids’ segments, Liberty positions itself as a full-spectrum family footwear brand. On the trade front, the executive views the India–EU agreement as a gradual opportunity, with any meaningful consumption shift away from China expected to take one to two years. Edited excerpts:
How do you view the government’s recent policy support, including GST changes, for the footwear industry?
The government is clearly focusing on the footwear industry, and both Indian consumers and brands are responding positively. These steps will help strengthen the sector.
I see a strong future for the footwear industry over the next 25 years. It will drive consumption as well as ‘Indianness’—the consumption of Indian products—which aligns with the broader vision of increasing domestic manufacturing and consumption.
What is your assessment of the India–EU trade agreement and its impact on the sector?
The trade environment has improved, but this is not an overnight shift. Europe is currently facing its own economic challenges, and any transition of consumption from China to India will take time—typically one to two years.
The real impact will not be immediate; it will unfold gradually over the next few years.
Is there a dominant trend in footwear demand today—athletic, casual or formal? Which categories are performing well for you?
As a footwear company catering to a diverse market, we see multiple consumer segments coexisting in a country of over a billion people. Some prefer athletic, others leisure, casual or formal—there is no single dominant trend.
While the market is currently focused on sneakers, that does not mean the black and brown formal category will decline significantly. It may see some moderation, but it remains an important segment.
For us, black and brown footwear contributes around 40 per cent of the business, F-leisure about 20 per cent, and the rest comes from women’s and kids’ segments.
With players launching rapid delivery models, what is your approach towards quick commerce in footwear?
We are not focusing heavily on this space at the moment because, ultimately, there is a cost involved for the consumer. There is little value in burning capital to create unrealistic expectations.
If a customer wants shoes in 30 or 60 minutes, the question is whether they are willing to pay for that convenience or wait a day. Creating unsustainable models purely to gain market share is not something we support as a legacy brand.
We are open to being part of the ecosystem, but only where it makes long-term sense for both the consumer and the business.
As a legacy brand, how do you balance retail and ecommerce? Which is more profitable?
At present, we are placing stronger bets on retail, where consumers can touch, feel and try products to get the right fit. We are targeting an 80:20 mix—80 per cent retail and 20 per cent ecommerce.Ecommerce largely caters to younger consumers who value convenience, but for many, visiting a store remains an experience. At this stage, retail is more profitable than online.
That said, as the market evolves, we will continue to recalibrate this balance. Currently, high costs in ecommerce tend to erode profitability.
Why do you believe ecommerce is becoming cost-heavy, and how do you see it evolving?
Ecommerce was initially expected to reduce costs, but in reality, platforms like Amazon and Meta capture a significant share of revenue through digital marketing spends.
Business growth on these platforms is often directly linked to how much you spend, which gives them considerable control over visibility and demand generation. This dynamic is not entirely equitable.
Earlier, discounts drove online shopping. Now, as convenience becomes the primary driver, consumers will decide whether to shop online or in-store. Over time, a more balanced ecosystem will emerge.
Which markets are you focusing on—Tier 1, Tier 2 or Tier 3 cities? How do you view growth and profitability?
While all markets are important, our primary focus is on Tier 2 cities and mini metros. Consumers in these markets have evolved, but there is still a strong aspiration towards established and, often, international brands—making this a significant opportunity for us.
That said, we remain open to all markets. Profitability is not defined by geography alone; it is a function of the overall business mix.
We cannot ignore any channel. Even if ecommerce is not highly profitable, it is essential for brand visibility. At the same time, the broader strategy must ensure that the business remains profitable overall.
