An Australian activewear brand with a genuine cult following, celebrity fans and $30 million in sales collapsed last month. The love was real. This is about what the love couldn't carry.
A few weeks ago, one of Australia's most loved activewear brands went into receivership.
Last week, it moved into liquidation.
If you're in the fitness world, you already know the name. Stax was founded in Perth in 2015 by Don and Matilda Robertson, and over ten years it became something very few Australian brands ever manage: a genuine cult label. Not manufactured hype. The real deal. Fashion-forward, inclusive pieces that people were proud to wear, a community that felt like it actually belonged to them, and a following that eventually reached some of the most famous women on the planet. Jennifer Lopez wore Stax. So did Lizzo, Hailey Bieber, Ashley Graham, Rita Ora and Addison Rae.
By 2022, the brand was reportedly doing around $30 million a year in sales, with a valuation of $52 million. At its peak it had 12 stores. When Stax ran a pop-up in Perth with creator Anna Paul, so many fans flooded the CBD that several people collapsed and police shut it down. An Australian activewear label generating crowd-control problems. That's the kind of love most brands would give anything for.
And unfortunately, none of it was enough.
I want to be really clear before we go any further, because this edition is different to the ones before it. This isn't a story about founders who did something wrong. By every account on record, Don and Matilda fought for this business hard, including selling their own cars last year to keep it going. The receivers pointed to inflation, brutal competition in athleisure, and the weight of high store rents.
These are conditions, not character flaws. When it ended, the founders fronted up publicly and said they were truly sorry. That takes more courage than most people will ever need to find, it speaks volumes on their exit.
But there's a lesson in here that matters too much to leave unexamined, and it's one I've been circling for months in this series.
A few editions ago, writing about a very different brand, I said the story and the system must be built together. Stax is what happens when one races ahead of the other. The brand was extraordinary.
The love was real. And the system underneath simply couldn't carry it when the weather changed.
Stax's reported annual sales in 2022, near the peak of the athleisure boom. Built in seven years, from Perth, largely through community and influencer love rather than traditional advertising.
The brand's reported valuation at its height. On paper, one of Australian activewear's great success stories.
Stores at their peak. Each one a signal of success at the time, and each one a fixed monthly cost that had to be paid whether the boom continued or not.
The life of the brand, 2015 to 2026. A decade of genuine cultural relevance that ended in receivership in June and liquidation weeks later.
Everything about Stax's brand was working. The community was real, the celebrity love was organic, the product had a point of view. If brand equity alone kept companies alive, Stax would be opening stores right now, not closing them.
Which forces a question most founders never ask while things are going well: what is actually holding this up?
It would be easy,to file Stax under "hype brand that burned out." It would also be wrong, and incredibly lazy.
Stax did the hard parts of brand building properly. They started in Perth, about as far from the fashion capitals as you can get, and built from community outward. The product was fashion-forward and genuinely inclusive at a time when plenty of activewear still wasn't. The influencer relationships were local and real before they were global and famous. People didn't wear Stax because an algorithm told them to. They wore it because it felt like theirs.
That's how you end up with Jennifer Lopez and Hailey Bieber in a Perth label without a Nike-sized budget. That's how you end up with a pop-up so swarmed that police shut it down. You can't buy that. Plenty of brands with ten times the funding have tried.
Brand love is real equity. It shows up as customers who defend you, queues that form without ads, celebrities who wear you unpaid. Stax earned all of it, honestly. The lesson of this story is not that the love was fake. It's that love and durability are two different assets, and a business needs both.
So, when we talk about what went wrong, hold this in the other hand: for ten years, this brand did what almost nobody does. The next two moves aren't a takedown of that.
They're about the machinery underneath it, because that's where this story was actually decided.
Now the harder part of the story, and the part with the most to learn from.
The years when Stax grew fastest were boom years for the category. Athleisure was exploding, money was cheap, and demand felt endless. In that environment, expansion looks obvious. More stores, more stock, more staff, more of everything, because every signal says the growth will continue.
Stax expanded to 12 stores.
The thing about a store: it's a promise about the future. A lease is a bet that next year's demand will look like this year's. Rent doesn't care whether the boom continues, it’s always due on the first of the month either way.
Then the weather changed, all at once. Inflation drove up every cost in the business. Interest rates squeezed the exact customers who buy $80 leggings. And the category itself became one of the most crowded in retail, with global giants and a hundred DTC brands all fighting for the same customer.
According to the receivers, it was this combination, rising costs, fierce competition and heavy rents, that brought the business down.
Fixed costs are decisions you make once and pay for every month afterwards. In good times they look like ambition. In hard times they become the reason you can't turn the ship. The brands that survive downturns aren't usually the most loved. They're the ones whose monthly obligations were small enough to shrink when the world did.
Stax didn't have a brand problem. It had a load-bearing problem. The story was carrying a structure that got heavier every year, and when conditions turned, no amount of community love could cover the gap between what the brand earned and what the model cost.
The founders saw it too, closing stores and selling their own vehicles to lighten the load.
The story and the system have to be built together. When the story runs ahead, the gap doesn't show up in good times. It shows up all at once.
In June, NAB placed Stax into receivership.
Within weeks, it moved to liquidation. Customers with unfilled orders were pointed to their banks for chargebacks. Ten years of brand building ended in a process run by accountants.
And then Don and Matilda did something that's worth noticing. They put their names on a public statement, said they were truly sorry, acknowledged that people were frustrated and out of pocket, and thanked the community that built them.
They called it the most difficult chapter of their lives, and you can certainly believe them.
It's important to remember that the way a brand ends is still part of the brand. Most founders will never face a collapse this public, but every founder will face moments where the honest option and the comfortable option point in different directions. Fronting up when it's hardest is the last brand-building act available to you, and it's the one people remember.
So what do you actually take from this, if you're building something right now? Not fear.
Something more useful: a habit of looking down. Every founder knows what their story is. Far fewer could tell you, precisely, what their business costs to exist each month, how long it survives if revenue halves, and which of their commitments are bets on the good times continuing.
Stax's story deserved to survive. The love was real, the community was real, the product was real. What this collapse teaches isn't that any of that was wrong. It's that none of it is a substitute for the boring machinery underneath: lean fixed costs, cash that buys you time, and a model that can flex when the world does.
The brands that compound aren't just the ones people love. They're the ones still standing when the weather turns, so the love has somewhere to live.
Brand love and durability are different assets. You need both.
Stax had as much genuine love as any Australian brand of its era, and it still wasn't enough. Love creates demand, but durability decides whether you're still there to serve it. If all your energy goes into being wanted and none into being resilient, you're only building half of the business.
Every fixed cost is a bet that the present continues.
Leases, salaries, subscriptions, minimum orders. Each one is signed once and paid forever, and each one assumes the world stays roughly as it is. Before you add a fixed cost, ask the uncomfortable version of the question: would I still sign this if revenue halved next year? Growth decided in boom conditions must be survivable in the opposite ones.
Know your number.
Not your revenue. Your survival number: what the business costs to exist each month, and how many months you'd last if sales fell hard. Most founders can recite their follower count faster than their fixed monthly obligations. The second number is the one that decides whether you get to keep playing.
Expansion should follow proof, not momentum.
Twelve stores felt right in a boom. The discipline is separating "we're growing because demand is durable" from "we're growing because everything is going up right now." If the whole category is booming, some of your growth belongs to the tide, and the tide doesn’t stay in forever.
If it ever goes wrong, be honest about it.
The founders' final public act was an honest apology, with their names on it, to the community that built them. Nobody wants that lesson. But integrity under pressure is the one asset that survives liquidation, and it's the thing people will remember about you long after the stock is gone.
The question this story leaves isn't whether people love your brand. Plenty of people loved this one and all the way to the end. The question is quieter and much less glamorous: if the weather turned tomorrow, could the system underneath your story carry it through two hard years? If you don't know the answer, that's not a reason to panic. It's just the next thing to go and find out.
Get the next edition before it goes live. Subscribe to The Brand Boardroom below.