Why the on-trade is decades behind retail on commercial data
Retail has spent decades connecting distribution, transactions, promotions and category performance to commercial decisions. In the on-trade, that information remains fragmented across suppliers, route-to-market partners and operators. Creating a steel thread through those signals can improve investment decisions and strengthen category leadership. However, it’s easier said than done.
The short answer
The on-trade does not lack data. It lacks a unified view of it. Brands can see sell-in, route-to-market partners can see venue orders and operators can see transactions, but few connect investment and activation with venue sales, portfolio performance and category growth. However, this is changing and it’s all about selecting your partners carefully.
Key takeaways
- The on-trade is becoming more data-enabled, creating an opportunity to connect its commercial signals.
- The on-trade has significant data, but lacks a steel thread connecting it into one usable commercial picture.
- The largest break is often between venue-level EPOS and the supplier or route-to-market view of performance.
- Volume and value growth need portfolio and category context before they demonstrate relative performance.
- Sell-in and distribution confirm movement through the supply chain, not customer demand or sustainable sales.
- Measurement should help teams improve live activity and direct future investment, not merely report outputs.
- Connected evidence strengthens account planning, category conversations and the next commercial decision.
The commercial context
In retail and the off-trade, brands can often connect distribution, availability, price, promotion and transactions within one commercial view. The on-trade is fundamentally different. This can often make our space feel less commercial than retail, and to some extent, it’s hard to argue with that. It’s essential that brands and suppliers do what they can to centralise their data sources. This starts with creating a data lake that you feed all available inputs, such as RTM pouring reports, direct customer sales records and field data. Use this information to try and understand patterns and opportunities, beyond searching for sound-bites from secondary macro data sources that often report disproportionately on managed and national groups.
This is true market intelligence.
What closing the data gap takes
The missing connection
A supplier sees sell-in, a route-to-market partner sees venue orders and an operator sees EPOS transactions. Execution sits elsewhere. The gap is the missing steel thread between these signals, not simply access to more data.
Growth needs category context
A brand can grow volume and value yet lose ground if its category grows faster. Top-line growth alone cannot show relative performance or establish that an activation generated incremental sales. The question is what changed across the brand, portfolio and category.
Connect the relevant evidence
Align venue sales with purchasing, activation and compliance over comparable periods. Account for outlet format and local conditions: data from selected managed venues is not automatically representative of independent free trade. The practical constraint is often the capacity and time to understand the feeds and identify what matters.
Make measurement useful
Evidence should help teams amplify what works, pause what does not and learn from both. It does not promise perfect optimisation or prove causation on its own. Operators should gain better account support, category insight and investment decisions in return for sharing data. That makes measurement the start of a stronger joint business conversation, not the final campaign report.
Evidence and example
GAZER applied this approach when helping Jägermeister assess the on-trade introduction of Jägermeister Orange. Jägerlabs connected granular venue, portfolio and category sales with pre-trial and same-period-last-year comparisons, mystery shopping, customer intercepts and operator feedback. This established whether growth was incremental, which serves and venue formats performed most strongly and what execution supported the result. The findings were then validated across a wider regional estate with fewer controls, creating a more scalable model for future decisions.
Read the Jägermeister Orange case studyOur view
The on-trade is behind retail in its ability to unify data into a commercial picture. Too often, investment and activation are reported separately from venue sales, leaving teams unable to judge whether an apparent success added demand or kept pace with the category. The opportunity is not to collect everything or promise a perfect answer. It is to connect the evidence needed for a better decision: what to continue, what to change and where to invest next. That should benefit the operator as well as the supplier, strengthening account support and joint planning beyond a conversation about volume and product price.
What should trade marketing teams do?
- Define the commercial and category question before selecting the available data.
- Agree access and responsibilities, then connect the minimum useful purchasing, EPOS and execution signals.
- Compare brand, portfolio and category performance across relevant venues and reporting periods.
- Review activity while it is live: amplify what works, pause what does not and learn from both.
- Use the findings to improve account support, joint business plans and the next investment decision.
The bottom line
The on-trade does not need more disconnected reports. It needs a steel thread linking investment and execution with venue sales, portfolio performance and category growth. That connection gives suppliers, operators and route-to-market partners a better basis for deciding what worked and what to do next. Measurement is the start of that conversation, not a claim that every commercial decision can be optimised.
Related questions
What is the on-trade data gap?
The on-trade data gap is the disconnect between information held by suppliers, route-to-market partners, operators and activation teams. Each organisation may understand one stage of the journey, but the data is rarely aligned sufficiently to explain the complete relationship between investment, execution and sales.
How can connected data create a sales pipeline?
Aligning route-to-market purchasing, pouring, venue, CRM and campaign data can reveal distribution gaps, competitor strength and accounts with the greatest right to win. Those opportunities can then be scored, assigned and tracked through a shared pipeline with clear ownership and next actions.
Why can’t suppliers rely on sell-in or wholesale order data?
Sell-in confirms that product entered the route to market, while account orders confirm that a venue purchased it. Neither proves that the product was activated correctly, sold to customers, generated incremental demand or was reordered after the initial listing.
How can data support category leadership with operator groups?
Suppliers can combine wider category evidence with the group’s own venue performance to identify underperformance, growth occasions, pricing or serve opportunities and repeatable activation mechanics. This creates an account-specific growth plan rather than a generic category presentation.
How can campaign data model future success?
When venue characteristics, activation mechanics, compliance and sales outcomes are recorded consistently, brands can identify patterns associated with stronger performance. These patterns can inform account prioritisation, expected benchmarks, investment decisions and the next best action.
Sources & methodology
This article draws on GAZER’s experience designing and measuring on-trade programmes for suppliers, route-to-market partners and operators. Its approach connects EPOS and category sales with purchasing, activation records, compliance and operator feedback. The Jägermeister Orange example draws on Jägerlabs and its regional validation. Detailed commercial results remain confidential.
