We are offering quality comparable to Gillette: Treet Corp CEO

‘For the first time, we are not just competing locally’

Syed Sheharyar Ali is the CEO of Treet Corporation Limited and is based in Lahore. He joined the company in 2001 and has spent over two decades working across operations, manufacturing, and management, building experience on the ground rather than through quick role changes.

His work today spans manufacturing as well as related interests in healthcare, hospitality, technology, automobiles, trade, and education. He is known for a hands-on approach, with a focus on strengthening processes, supporting teams, and thinking in terms of long-term continuity.

He comes from a business family with roots in pre-Partition India, with earlier generations involved in trade, industry, and Pakistan’s early economic development, including support to Muhammad Ali Jinnah and early engagement with international industry figures such as Henry Ford.

Following are the edited excerpts of a recent conversation BR Research had with him:

BR Research: TREET has different business segments—razors, batteries, soap, pharma, packaging. Which of these are your main focus for the future versus the others and why?

Syed Sheharyar Ali: All our businesses have strong potential—packaging, pharma, batteries, and solar are all growing—but what excites me most is blades and shaving, because that is our core and our heritage. Treet is a 73-year-old brand that my father’s generation knows well, but younger consumers don’t relate to it in the same way, which is a real business risk.

Genesis is our way of rebuilding that relevance. It allows us to create a premium brand from scratch—something we’ve never done before—while still leveraging the credibility of the Treet umbrella. For the first time, we are not just competing locally; we are stepping up to international-quality benchmarks and telling a new, modern story for a new generation.

BRR: You have launched new brands like Genesis and Estella. Why not just launch new SKUs under the traditional “Treet” name?

SSA: Because Treet as a brand has historically been positioned for the masses—everyday use, value-driven, widely accessible. For Genesis, we wanted a different identity: premium, modern, aspirational. If we launched it purely as another Treet SKU, it would inherit the same perception.

So, we chose “Genesis”, with an association with Treet in our communications, to get the best of both worlds: (1) it can stand on its own as a premium brand, and (2) it still carries the strength, heritage, and credibility of the Treet umbrella. That standalone premium feel was a deliberate strategy, not a cosmetic change.

BRR: Pakistan is a very price-sensitive market. How will a premium shaving brand win share here—especially against imported and Western brands? And why launch Genesis now—why not five years ago? Was this linked to multinational exits or a change in strategy?

SSA: Even in a price-sensitive market like Pakistan, there is always a segment that is willing to pay for better quality, experience, and appearance. While that segment is smaller than in international markets, it is growing—and Genesis has been positioned precisely for it. We are offering quality comparable to leading international brands like Gillette, but at roughly a 30 percent lower price, making it premium in positioning but still strong on value. The rising “Made in Pakistan” sentiment also works in our favour, as consumers are increasingly willing to choose high-quality local brands.

Availability is another key advantage. Smuggled and imported products exist, but they are often inconsistent in supply, especially when it comes to replacement cartridges. Our ability to provide reliable availability across the country gives us a strong competitive edge.

This launch is not driven by recent multinational exits. We have been developing Genesis for over two years, and it reflects a deeper shift inside Treet itself. Over the last five years, we have moved from being a volume-driven company to a value-driven one. That change is visible in how we invest, how we build brands, and how we compete—and Genesis is the first major expression of that new strategy.

BRR: What is the domestic market you’re targeting for Genesis—and will it cannibalize your existing Treet razor/blade business?

READ MORE: Treet Corp revises launch date for two personal care brands

SSA: We are targeting the premium segment that used to be served by brands like Gillette and others—roughly the 15–20 percent share of the market that sits above the mass segment. We do not see Genesis cannibalizing our existing Treet offerings because it is aimed at a different consumer segment with a different buying behaviour.

This is not about shifting our current customer from Treet to Genesis. It’s about capturing the premium segment that we historically didn’t own. In other words, Genesis should take share from premium imported or international-equivalent brands, not from our own base.

BRR: You mentioned international markets are the “real challenge.” Why is that, and what will it take to compete globally?

SSA: Internationally, the competitive bar is higher and the market is deeper. Domestically, we are confident we can offer a strong proposition: high quality at an attractive price point, improved distribution, and a local brand story. Globally, the challenge is competing on complete systems and ensuring we have everything in-house.

Blade manufacturing is our strength. But for system razors, handles and cartridge assembly matter a lot. Historically, our weakness was in handle-making and cartridge assembly. With Genesis, we have plans to bring those capabilities in-house, because once you control the full system, you can compete much more effectively internationally.

BRR: Given TREET’s strong global reputation in blade manufacturing, what share of your revenues currently comes from exports, how do you see that evolving over the next few years, and what is your core competitive advantage in blades that allows you to defend and grow that position internationally?

SSA: Exports currently account for about 20–30 percent of our revenues, with the rest coming from the local market. We were once closer to a 50–50 split, but exports declined as the global market shifted from basic shaving formats to system razors, where we were not fully present. That is now changing. Our goal is to take exports back to 50% or more within the next three to five years, and our five-year growth plan is built around that international expansion as we bring more of the system-razor value chain in-house in coming years.

Our core advantage is blade manufacturing. High-quality blades are extremely difficult to make at scale—only six to eight companies worldwide can do it well, and we are one of them. Even China, despite its manufacturing strength, has not been able to match our edge quality, which is why it is actually one of our largest export markets—Chinese manufacturers import our blades to use in their own razors. That speaks to the depth and defensibility of our technology.

BRR: Trends like “beard fashion” changed shaving habits globally. Over the last decade, has this impacted your sales and demand profile?

SSA: Beard fashion did grow, but it didn’t eliminate razor use—people still shave necklines, edges, and facial contours. The market shifted, it didn’t disappear. More recently, we’re also seeing heavier beard trends ease and shaving return among younger consumers, with self-grooming supporting growth in system razors. Overall, the trend changed how razors are used, not the underlying demand.

BRR: You are entering women’s hygiene with “Estella.” What convinced you the opportunity is real in Pakistan despite cultural taboos?

SSA: Internationally, women’s razors account for 20–30 percent of the market, but in Pakistan the segment has been largely under-served and rarely discussed—even though the demand exists. We are launching a full women’s range covering eyebrow, face, body, and hygiene shavers. What really validated the opportunity for us was that our best-selling online SKU is a women’s eyebrow razor—despite zero marketing.

With Genesis and Estella, we will run a 360-degree campaign to educate consumers and build awareness. Once education and availability come together, we believe the women’s segment can become a meaningful new revenue stream, precisely because it fills a major gap in the market.

BRR: You’re launching about 35 SKUs at once. What does the launch footprint look like—and why launch everything together?

SSA: We are launching roughly 35 SKUs spanning from two-blade system razors and disposables up to five-blade premium systems. We’re also introducing a niche “cut-throat” style single-blade shaving concept for people who treat shaving as an experience—like the hot towel shave ritual.

What’s new for us is the scale and coordination: these SKUs will be available in 800+ outlets at the same time. This is the first time in TREET’s history we’re doing a synchronized launch of this breadth. It signals seriousness to the market, improves consumer visibility, and supports the premium brand-building goal.

BRR: You’re also entering grooming products (face washes, deodorants, shaving gels, etc.). Is this a revenue play or a brand-building play?

SSA: It’s mainly about brand-building and portfolio completeness. Grooming is new for us, and while these products may not be big revenue drivers initially, a full range helps position us as a complete grooming brand, not just a razor company. With a young, image-conscious population and rising focus on personal care, we see grooming as a natural and growing extension of our portfolio.

BRR: A few years back, TREET was seen as financially stressed—leveraged, expanding into new verticals, hit by interest rates and COVID. What went wrong, and what did you learn?

SSA: The biggest lesson is simple: never over-leverage, no matter how confident you are. We were over-leveraged, and then a sequence of external shocks hit—interest rates moved from roughly 9–10 percent to 24 percent, currency parity shifted sharply, and COVID disrupted operations. At the same time, we entered three new verticals we didn’t fully understand, and we did it too quickly.

How did we recover? We took painful corrective steps—debt restructuring, and yes, selling personal assets to meet obligations. But the core turnaround was operational: we built a stronger professional team—finance, supply chain, marketing, and others —and changed how the company runs. We moved from operational losses to consolidated profitability, and the difference between then and now is night and day.

BRR: Over the next few years, how do you plan to finance growth—profits, debt, equity, or something else?

SSA: It will be a mix. Profitability now gives us room to reinvest internally. But understand that a major expansion in production or technology may need more —where we bring experience and operational strength, and partners bring capital. Some expansion may still involve debt, but we’re much more careful now given what we learned.

We’re also reviewing our investment structure in subsidiaries. For instance, in the battery business we don’t necessarily need to hold 90 percent ownership; we can reduce shareholding while retaining control—similar to how we’ve structured other parts—so we can unlock capital without creating excessive leverage.

BRR: Let’s talk about batteries. With UPS demand falling but solar storage growing, how is your battery business evolving?

SSA: Battery has been growing and performing better than many peers. Historically, a big part of the business comes from the automotive side—around 60%—and the rest from UPS/backup. UPS demand has shrunk, but automotive demand has increased, which has hedged the business.

The bigger shift now is technology: lithium-ion is the future. Prices have come down substantially over the last 2–3 years, and with solarization expanding, demand for storage solutions will rise. We’ve partnered with a major Chinese manufacturer to launch lithium-ion batteries plus inverters—about five SKUs across different sizes, including tower and wall-mounted solutions.

We will start with imported solutions first so we can learn what works locally—what SKUs click, which don’t. After that, we plan to assemble locally, and eventually, we want to develop battery management systems in Pakistan too.

BRR: In lithium-ion, dozens of importers are already in the market. What makes you confident you can win?

SSA: Two strengths - distribution and trust. Lithium-ion warranties are long—three years up to ten years. So, the real question for consumers is: will the seller exist in five years to honour the claim? Many of the new importers might not.

Treet as a group has 70+years of history. That credibility matters in a warranty-driven product. We believe we can build a stronger, more reliable value proposition for consumers compared to short-lived sellers who may not sustain quality and service.

BRR: You were early in maintenance-free automotive batteries. How does the first-mover advantage help today?

SSA: The market has two broad categories: maintained traditional batteries and maintenance-free. While competitors also sell maintenance-free now, we are number one by volume in maintenance-free due to early investment and branding.

Maintenance-free is a growing segment and will ultimately replace maintained batteries—Pakistan is one of the few countries where maintained automotive batteries still exist at scale. Our leadership there has also provided a financial cushion during industry price wars, and our earlier pivot towards automotive away from backup helped us ride out volatility better than others.

BRR: Your pharma business holds a large domestic share in haemodialysis concentrates. What is the growth plan—especially exports?

SSA: Pharma is doing well and is largely an export play. Domestically, we already have about 60–70 percent market share in haemodialysis concentrates, so growth will increasingly come from exports.

We had a slow start because we moved facilities and had to update registrations, certifications, and compliance documentation—medical products require that rigor. But our facility is among the latest and largest in the segment, and Pakistan’s cost base is meaningfully lower than many other markets. Over the next six to twelve months, we expect stronger results as those regulatory and registration transitions settle.

BRR: How serious is the problem of smuggling and counterfeiting, and how do you respond operationally?

SSA: It’s serious and it has two layers: (1) counterfeiting of our products and (2) smuggled products competing unfairly. We have built an in-house team to identify counterfeit production points. We collaborate withgovernment authorities with market intelligence, who thenraid, seal facilities, and pursue legal action. On average, this collaboration is shutting down roughly one counterfeit factory per month.

For smuggled products in markets, we often start with education. Many shopkeepers don’t even realize they’re stocking counterfeit or smuggled goods. We meet market leadership, explain the illegality and the harm (including the loss of duties/taxes), and most markets cooperate. If education doesn’t work, we involve law enforcement.

At the same time, we believe one structural fix is needed: a dedicated government cell focused on counterfeit and smuggling across industries—because when you raid one facility, you may find multiple counterfeit product lines under one roof, but agencies only act on the complaint they received.

BRR: Costs in Pakistan keep rising. What are the main ways TREET is protecting profit margins—energy, local sourcing, automation, productivity, or price?

SSA: We are focusing on three big levers: solarization, localization, and automation.

Energy is one of our largest costs. Both major plants have been solarized. We have about 1.2 MW solar at the Treet plant and over 2 MW at the battery plant, reducing power cost by more than 50 percent relative to requirement.

Localization is also key. Some inputs—like specialized steel for blades—cannot be localized because the domestic industry cannot produce that grade. But we are localizing everything possible: terminals, plastic parts, and other components that previously had to be imported.

Automation is another lever. There was a time when manual labour was the cheaper option; that’s no longer automatically true. We are pushing for higher productivity through automation and process redesign. The result is important: despite cost pressures, our profitability has improved, not declined—both in local and export segments.

BRR: Pakistan is often described as an over-regulated economy. Which regulatory or compliance burdens hurt TREET the most, and how do they affect competitiveness?

SSA: The hardest part is not regulation itself—it’s the uneven enforcement and uneven compliance across competitors. We pay our taxes fully, we maintain certifications, we comply. But when competitors can evade taxes, under-invoice imports, or bypass standards, they can sell at prices that are sometimes even below our cost of production.

That distorts the market and slows honest companies down. In some segments, we feel it took us years just to reach break-even partly because the “playing field” wasn’t level. If compliance and tax enforcement were consistent across the board, it would improve competitiveness, expand the revenue base of the country, and reward companies that operate transparently.

BRR: What is your core message to policymakers and regulators—what single change would improve the industrial environment the most?

SSA: A level playing field. Either reduce duties and simplify the structure in a way that makes compliance easier—or enforce compliance consistently so everyone pays their share. We are fine paying taxes; we already do. But it must become the norm.

Smuggling and counterfeiting are serious, but we can manage them with enforcement and market education. The bigger issue is when large competitors can operate outside the same rules—because then the industry becomes structurally unfair, and honest investment is punished.