Convinced Even More That Wal-Mart Should Be The Winner v. Amazon

I have written many times about the idea of Walmart v. Amazon in the battle of retailing and e-commerce.  My basic thesis has always been this:  Walmart can do everything Amazon can do but Amazon CANNOT do everything Walmart can do.  And, yes, it revolves around the stores.  

One of my first posts on this topic was back in March of 2013 when I posted "The Battle for Retail Sales is Really the Battle of Supply Chains".  In that article I concluded:

"In the end I believe Walmart and the other big retailers can and should be able to beat Amazon.  Just like Dell could have and should have beaten Asus and just like Sears could have and should have beaten Walmart."

I concluded because of the huge logistics and retail head start Walmart had they could beat Amazon at their own game.  I also, however, posited the problem Walmart would have - the ability to innovate and brand.  Here I said:

"The problem for companies like Wal-Mart and other retailers is they are losing the "branding" war.  The name "Amazon" is becoming synonymous with on line shopping.  People I talk to really do not "shop" on line they just go to Amazon to buy what they want.  It is becoming what Marissa Mayer (New CEO of Yahoo) calls a "daily habit".  As a consumer, you decide whether you are going to go to a store or buy on line.  If you decide to buy on line you go directly to Amazon.  I am sure Wal-Mart has all sorts of statistics that try to pat themselves on their backs but reality is Amazon is building a brand which equates to on line shopping - The Amazon brand is to on line shopping what the term "Xerox" is to copiers.  If this hole gets too deep, Wal-Mart may not be able to dig out. "

Then, it appeared Walmart "awakened" and I wrote a post titled: "Welcome Back Wal-Mart:  We Missed You Over The Last 5 Years".  In this article I discussed how I went to a Walmart and also used their on-line e-commerce system.  Both experiences were extraordinary and this posting was written about 1 year ago.

Today, I have seen the future and it is, in fact, in Walmart.  I am more convinced then ever they will win this as long as they stay hungry, scrappy and focused on the customer.  In my local Walmart they recently added the giant "Pick up Tower" which essentially is an automated way for you to buy products, have them brought to the store and have a very seamless and frictionless way of getting them.   A picture of this is to the left.  Because just about everyone in America goes past a Walmart just about every day, ordering on line and picking up in the store is essentially a no-brainer.  Can Amazon do that?  Sure in the few Whole Foods stores, maybe, but not at the scale a Walmart can do it in. 

So, think of this scenario.  You "shop" on line at night after work and in front of your T.V.  You set to pick it up tomorrow at the local Walmart.  On your way home from work you swing past, you pick it up and voila.. it is at home.  So, why is this so intriguing to me?  Well, it is because there are a few external events occurring in the retail / e-commerce space which are converging and making the pure e-commerce play more difficult.   They are:

1. Rising Cost of Transportation:  Who does not know about this topic?  The way to mitigate high costs of transportation is to keep trucks "fullest the furthest" and don't break them down until you absolutely have to.  This allows for far more efficiencies when delivering to stores than to people's homes.

2. The Rise of "Porch Pirates":  This is a very interesting phenomena where people just go around to houses and steal delivered goods.  If you live in an apartment complex, it is like the wild wild west.  Between people stealing and boxes being left at wrong buildings and doors, it is a true mess.  Many companies are trying to solve this with "lockers", ability to go into your home, delivery to trunks etc. but net net, it all adds cost and complexity to the delivery system. The simple solution already exists - deliver it to a store.

3. Infrastructure Costs: Without a store network, the cost of building out a really good e-commerce infrastructure are astronomical.  The Home Depot, which already has one of the best supply chains in retail and has 2200 stores is about to spend over $1bl to build out what they believe they need for same day / next day service.  Imagine if you are starting from scratch?

4. Inability of Small Package Carriers to Deal With "Surge" Periods:  Finally, we hear this every Christmas season - one of the two major players will have "guessed" wrong and either they lose their shirt in terms of cost or they have not nearly the capacity needed to service the boxes. 

In the end, this is Walmart's game to lose and it appears they have no intention of losing.  I personally use both and am a "Prime Member" however when that comes up for renewal I think I will be rethinking that automatic sign up.  From a supply chain perspective, I believe Walmart is better situated than any other retailer in the business for the following reasons:

1. A very mature small box, big box and cold chain distribution network already in place.  They have a huge head start.

2. The ability to service an "endless aisle".  With this mechanism you could buy anything from them even if they never stock in the store.

3. Prime real estate for retail.  Any chance you do not drive past one?

4. Walmart Pay:  I have not mentioned this but the ease of paying using Wal-Mart pay is truly incredible. Also, it does not use NFC but rather QR codes which means all phones essentially can use it (Google Pay and Apple Pay require NFC which is in higher end phones). 

The battle continues but right now, due to the maturity of the supply chain, I am leaning to Walmart.

 

Amazon Doesn't Kill Businesses - Ignoring Customer Needs Does

I am going to formulate a more detailed post on this tonight and I think this is a topic needing coverage. It is all about how Amazon got where they are.

The central point: Don't blame Amazon for killing retail.  Amazon was and still is insanely focused on the customer which causes them to innovate around CUSTOMER needs and not internal politics.

While other companies are trying to figure out how to cut out value for the customer to improve costs, Amazon figured out what will "wow" the customer and then figured out how to do this at an acceptable cost.

If others would get maniacal about serving the customer, they could compete. The funny thing is most won't do it.

Welcome Back Wal-Mart - We Missed You Over the Last 5 Years.

I hesitated writing about the Amazon purchase of Whole Foods as many have written about it already and much is not yet known about how Jeff Bezos is going to use Whole Foods in the continued growth of his retail empire.  One thing for sure is whatever he does with it will be completely different than most people think.  That is what makes Bezos so brilliant and why no one has been able to beat him.  In some ways, only he knows what he really is doing.

But then I re-read an article I posted in March of 2013 titled, "The Battle for Retail is Really The Battle of Supply Chains".  In this article I opined that the big retailers are all essentially selling the same products, many of which have been or very quickly are commoditized.  This means the real value add of a retailer is in their supply chain.

I also concluded in this article that Wal-Mart should be able to kill Amazon as they already have the bricks and mortars along with the capability of great e-commerce.  Finally, I concluded that due to the age old issue of The Innovators Dilemma which was created by Clayton Christensen in his seminal book of the same name.  Unfortunately, for the last 4 years, and for Wal-Mart,  my prediction came true.

The good news is Wal-Mart, like the sleeping giant, has now been awoken.  With its purchase of Jet.com it admitted it needed great e-commerce and, in the same transaction, admitted it could not do this on its own.  The big behemoth could not innovate so it had to buy.  That is OK as it is at least now on the path to competing with Amazon.

But then a funny thing happened.  Amazon admitted it could not grow bricks and mortars fast enough in the grocery space to compete so it made a bold purchase.  In this purchase, Bezos is essentially admitting he wants to move a little more towards a Wal-Mart model and also showed, in this purchase, the only reason Wal-Mart has not crushed Amazon is due to lack of execution and lack of strategic foresight.

Well, no more.  I believe Wal-Mart truly has awoke and they are starting to adjust their supply chain very quickly to mirror a "be where ever the customer is" retailer.  This means if you are out and need something quickly, you can pull into your Wal-Mart and get it.  If you want to order on line and have it shipped, you can do that.  If you want to avoid shipping charges, you can buy on line and pick it up in the store.  Basically, any configuration of how the consumer wants to interact to get the products she needs, Wal-Mart will be there.  Wal-Mart can ship from DCs or from any of its 4,177 stores of which 3,275 are super centers.  Wow!  Wouldn't Amazon love to have that footprint.

If Wal-Mart executes they have a chance of beating Amazon.  I recently used Wal-Mart on line to buy a UPS for my computer.  It was a great experience, shipped fast and was less expensive than Amazon.

I do think the speciality retailer is dead.  Consumers want the "endless aisle" that Amazon and Wal-Mart provide. They do not want to bounce around to 100 different websites to find what they want.

Wal-Mart can do everything Amazon can do (or they should be able to do it) yet Amazon cannot come close to all the capabilities of a Wal-Mart.  If I were investing, the only stock I would buy in the retail space is Wal-Mart.  I would then go to their shareholders meeting and scream two phrases:  "Wake Up" and "Execute"!

Welcome back Wal-Mart - I missed you!

Macroeconomic Monday® - Inventory to Sales Ratio

Goes to show, I should never take a break from blogging.  "While I was out", the inventory to sales ratio in the economy has made a very nice move.  While not even close to the post recession area it is starting to move down which indicates the bleeding off of inventory has begun.  Of course, for transportation to tighten, and rates to go up, this will need to tighten some more.

While there is optimism, February retail sales at .1% definitely slowed this movement.

There is also the wild card of autos.  Ford has already warned on inventory and slow sales which means a lot of capacity becomes available as the automotive industry adjusts (read: idles plants).

More to come but let's call this a "good sign" if you are on the capacity side and an "early warning" if you are on the shipper side.

 

Inventories to Sales Ratio

Retailers Compete on Supply Chain - Part Deux

I have talked for years in speeches and in advising companies that the supply chain will become the competitive advantage for those trying to move products to market.  Especially if you are a retailer, you compete on supply chain in a major way.  In a blog post recently, titled Execution IS a Strategy I also talked about how great execution, more and more, differentiates the different retailers.  The same product is on the shelf and it is just a matter of who executes better. 

Adrian, over at Logisticsviewpoints highlighted the new service from Sears called "Fulfilled by Sears" (Posting titled: In Logistics, Somebody has to Own The Assets) which is an interesting development following my theory above.  Essentially, Sears is leveraging their fantastic Sears Logistics Services to become a world class 3PL in fulfillment services.  This follows the same developments at both Amazon and Wal-Mart. 

The question is why would a retailer dedicate talent, capital and executive time to opening up their logistics networks to anyone who wants to sell?  Wouldn't this be considered a distraction (especially since Sears at least is in the middle of a fight for pure survival)? The answer is twofold:

First, the simple economics are that each of these companies have to make huge infrastructure investments to keep their own business alive.  If they can leverage this infrastructure cover the variable cost of adding new clients and also contribute some to covering the fixed cost then they will be helped financially.  This is the same reason 3PLs have multi-client facilities - leverage the fixed costs.  Essentially, anyone selling through these networks is actually helping these retailers cover the cost of their huge logistics networks.

Second, they are basically saying they are the best 3PL in the nation and you should use them for that purpose.  They are competing  on logistics and supply chain strategy.  Once they get you into the fulfillment services they can sell you more and more logistics and supply chain  services. 

The group which should be very interested in this development are the true 3PL organizations.  For the vast majority of these networks, the "big 3" use their own labor and their own buildings along with, for the most part, their own software.  This is a play right out of "Porter's Five Forces" where a customer goes upstream and takes business from their suppliers. The buyer clearly is holding the power and the suppliers (i.e. 3PLs ) should be concerned with what Porter calls "Buyers threat of backward integration".    More on this interesting development later.

Is The "Final 3 Feet" The Most Important Logistics Leg?

I have talked a lot about "Final Mile" logistics especially since so many are trying to compete in this area.  From next day delivery to same day delivery to "crowd sourcing" delivery just about every retailer is trying to get an advantage over the other through a more efficient final mile delivery network.

However, 90% of shopping is still done in retail stores and the final 3 feet are the most important part of the execution of in store logistics.  Most logisticians are experts at lean and in plant logistics - getting parts and components efficiently to the assembly line to ensure a very lean and efficient manufacturing process.  But how many apply the same kind of rigor to the final 3 feet - getting product from the store room to the actual retail floor.  After all, if the product is not on the shelves it will be tough for people to buy the item they need.

In an article titled "Walmart Customers Say Shelves Are Empty" the Business Insider describes what appears to be a growing problem in Walmarts - product stacking up in back store rooms and no real system or staff to get it to shelves.  A tightly wound supply chain gets it to the 3 yard line but cannot bring it into the end zone.

Perhaps in store logistics needs to be elevated as a discipline especially as stores become larger and are managing more SKUs and product categories.  Goals of this should be:

1. Keep shelves always stocked without appearing to be stuffed
2. Keep product out of the aisles (nothing worse than aisles being used as storage space
3. Much like Disney where you never see anyone empty trash, yet it is always empty, you should figure out how to restock shelves out of the view of the customer.  
4. Have a detailed planograph for every store shelf / floor spot, have a method to measure fill rate at that point and have a detailed plan to restock. 
5. Start every day with 100% fill at the shelf level.  You will have a running start in keeping the day going well. 

The model below is a quick drawing I did on my iPad to illustrate the point:

Sorry for the quality but I needed to do this fast so I drew it with my finger as I could not find my stylus.  What the graph on the bottom shows is the level of "lean" at each stage of the supply chain from raw material extraction through conversion to the store (store room) then to the retail floor.  It is your typical bathtub effect.  We lean the heck out of the process through conversion and in distribution but then this article claims the final 3 feet is full of waste and piled up product.  

This article blames it on staffing levels and I do not know enough about the staffing levels at Walmart to either support or deny that hypothesis (although the graph below makes a compelling case) I do believe the need to concentrate and develop a solid in store logistics plan is necessary for all retailers.  No sense in having an incredibly lean supply chain if the product never makes it to the location where a customer can actually buy it.  

The Battle for Retail Sales is Really The Battle of Supply Chains

I continue to believe the battle for retail sales is really all about the underlying supply chains rather than the actual store.  The "store experience" is losing its importance to the more broader "order fulfillment" experience.  The backbone of this order fulfillment experience is the underlying supply chain efficiency of the retail company.  The key metrics for consumers include:

1. How easy is it to find what I want on your site / store?
2. Is the product readily available? (final three feet logistics which I will write about later)
3. How quickly can you get that product?
4. Is it packaged in such a way that the product can survive the entire trip (from MFG to DC to store to your house).  Of course, the store part is increasingly being eliminated.
5. How easy can it be returned?  Here I think of packaging and labeling so if I buy the product and decide to return it the process is simple for me to repackage it and put it back in the supply chain stream to get back to a returns center
6. Is it low cost?
7. How easy is it to pay?
8. How quickly do I get the credit back if I have to return it?

All of this is enveloped by world class customer service (Think Zappos) which makes you feel great and enjoy the entire experience.  Think about how Disney World makes you enjoy what is essentially waiting in long lines.  This is what the order fulfillment customer experience has to be like. 

The battle is increasingly being waged between Amazon.com and Wal-Mart's on line brand.  I will not pretend to judge who wins in this case although I think it is clear if the game ended now Amazon would win.  What is not clear is whether they can continue winning given the massive head start Wal-Mart has had in developing its supply chain.  For expertise, Wal-Mart can just hire a bunch of Amazon people so I am not overly worried about the talent pool.  

Challenges facing Amazon now include the high cost of building out a massive infrastructure (which Wal-Mart already has), the change in sentiment for sales tax collection (plan on paying sales tax on all on line purchases soon) and the high cost of final mile delivery which is required for Amazon but not necessarily required for Wal-Mart (see my posting on Wal-Mart testing out a locker system and crowd sourcing their deliveries).

The problem for companies like Wal-Mart and other retailers is they are losing the "branding" war.  The name "Amazon" is becoming synonymous with on line shopping.  People I talk to really do not "shop" on line they just go to Amazon to buy what they want.  It is becoming what Marissa Mayer (New CEO of Yahoo) calls a "daily habit".  As a consumer, you decide whether you are going to go to a store or buy on line.  If you decide to buy on line you go directly to Amazon.  I am sure Wal-Mart has all sorts of statistics that try to pat themselves on their backs but reality is Amazon is building a brand which equates to on line shopping - The Amazon brand is to on line shopping what the term "Xerox" is to copiers.  If this hole gets too deep, Wal-Mart may not be able to dig out.  

For years, Wal-Mart has been known as the world class supply chain company.  However, they could be at the cross roads where their supply chain is so tightly wound and so tightly integrated to a "bricks and mortars" experience they cannot adapt to the on line requirements.  This would not be the first time a well managed and world class supply chain became trouble for a company.

Think Dell and how incredible they were in a tightly wound and highly efficient supply chain designed to build desktop and tower computers. A funny thing happened:  The consumer moved to laptops.  While no one wanted to look at desktops before they bought as most were under your desk hidden away (lending itself to a build to order, direct buy model) everyone wanted to look at laptops. Laptops are a visible appliance.  This meant a need for retail space.  Further, the build to order did not need factories.  Go to an Apple store or Best Buy, buy a laptop and right there they will upgrade memory, install devices etc. etc.  Dell's huge competitive advantage with towers and desktops became a competitive disadvantage in the move to laptops.  Due to their size, retailers were willing to display them as they did not take a lot of shelf space or store room space. Essentially the entire model for buying computers changed in what appeared to be an overnight transformation. Dell was not ready and cold not change quickly enough. 

If I were advising Wal-Mart I would study this well to ensure they do not make the same mistake relative to on line purchasing and competing with Amazon.  

In the end I believe Wal-Mart and the other big retailers can and should be able to beat Amazon.  Just like Dell could have and should have beaten Asus and just like Sears could have and should have beaten Wal-Mart.  One thing we do know is due to the Innovator's Dilemma big companies tend to get crushed eventually by small start ups .  What is fascinating is how these small start ups, once they become big, make the exact same mistakes and eventually get crushed.  This is phenomenon is described in detail in Clayton Christenson's seminal book titled "The Innovator's Dilemma" and why some big companies cannot see what is clearly in front of them is described in detail in the book "Denial" by Richard Tedlow (Both professors I had at HBS).  Should be required reading and I have put a link to those books below (Yes, through Amazon).

Lessons From Kozmo.com for Same Day Delivery

Yes, it is true if you live long enough what is old will be new again.  This, of course, is the situation as it relates to the so called same day delivery wars.  I have mentioned over and over again that I am very skeptical of this beyond being a marketing hype ploy as the density needed (low miles per stop and high number of packages per stop) is virtually unachievable except in very dense cities.  And, of course, in those cities "couriers" have been around a long time so same day delivery is not new.

Now even our friends at the Wharton School of Business have weighed in on this by analyzing what went wrong in the late '90s with Kozmo in a posting entitled " Same Day Delivery: This Time it May Actually Work" - an organization dedicated to same day delivery which went out in a flash of glory - and why this time it may be different.  The basis of this argument?  It is all about density.

The issues remain and the questions continue to go unanswered in my humble opinion.  Some of them are:

1. How will you get the density?
2. How will you overcome the high costs of fuel?
3. Will this really generate incremental sales?
4. What happens when this becomes "an expectation"?  
5. Will this be given away for free and ultimately put pressure on margins?
6. Do people even want it (beyond the procrastinators who are probably not your best customers)?

The answer to number 6 equates to the idea of sticking a knife in a horse to get one last gallop out of it before you run it to death (i.e., What Kris Kristofferson does in True Grit).  Every retailer is fighting over that last incremental dollar as if it will make or break them.  My analysis suggests the amount of money spent to get that very last dollar of revenue probably is not worth it however that is what they are doing as a crowd.  They want that last dollar and appear to be ready to spend a fortune to get it.  

In my next posting on Same Day Delivery, I will propose a solution to this issue and we shall see what they think.