That is less efficient on the cost side but might be more efficient on the consumer side. So the — what should I say, our strategy will be to be the best sports brand globally from a credibility point of view, but then execute more local which again then, of course, could be limiting your max profitability. That’s why I talk about 10% and not 14%. And again, everything I have seen in the 4 months both from people, from structures, from innovations tells me that we have all the chances to do this in our way. I don’t think I should comment on previous targets and strategies because I don’t think that’s my job. I look at the market and I look at this fantastic brand and I put the pieces together. I look around the table and we all say, yes, 10% is achievable.
And yes, we agree we should be adi and not Nike. And if there is an upside to that, then there is an upside to it. I don’t think we should now force ourselves into artificial numbers on e-com and say that China should be 18% or 14% or whatever. Let us fix the basics, let us set up the structure, let us clean up the inventory and then we can have a midterm discussion when we come with our strategy. But the 10% is achievable. And again, I really think that adi has a special DNA that should have a business model different than anybody else and we should be visible in more than the 5 big sports. We should be more, what should I say, retail friendly, and we should be what adidas once made it, the best company for the athlete and the consumer. And I think if we do that, instead of trying to impress you with artificial numbers, we will be successful.
And then the irony of that is if we do that right, then the profitability can even be higher than we talk about, right? So expect us to work the way we said and then let us come back at the end of the year, beginning of the next year with a new strategy. I think that’s the fairest way of doing it.
Cedric Lecasble: That’s very helpful, Bjorn. Maybe just to put a difference on China, do you think conditions are met for China to become again the profitable markets that it used to be for international…
Bjorn Gulden: Well, if you think about that, they have 1.4 billion, 1.5 billion consumer. If you think about that, the retail structure is very homogeneous. There’s basically 2 big partners, maybe 3, D2C that is a big e-com business and that the differences geographically in China is much smaller than what they are in other markets, then the answer is yes. All the ingredients for making that the most profitable market is there. And again, with 1.4 billion consumer, you would also think that the growth rate there should be one of the highest. My favorite to be the growth winner the next years after LatAm is going to be India, because you start to see a development in India also from a consumer point of view that they’re buying more Western brands.
They’re doing more sports, and of course, I would hold them as a favorite percentage-wise in growth. But again, India is a more complex structure, so it might be less profitable. But for me, China is still the favorite to be the most profitable market in our portfolio.
Operator: The next question comes from Aneesha Sherman from Bernstein.
