Have Clicks and Bricks Won The Game over Pure E-Commerce

First, I will give you my hypothesis answer which is "Yes" it has.  Of course, I have been wrong before and will be wrong again but this would be my position going into the discussion.  Because of COVID19 we have learned the proper mix of "I need go to the store" with "I can wait to get it delivered". So, yes, my answer is an resounding "Yes".

I see this for three main reasons and in this posting I am going use Amazon as the proxy for e-commerce since it is so dominant in that space.  A little background on how this idea started developing.  I tweeted the following:

"A casualty of #Covid19 in the Supply chain is going to be #Amazon. With elongated delivery times, missed deliveries and massive counterfeiting, @amazon has become useless. #Bricksandclicks with in-store pick up, curbside car loading and local delivery has won the day.

— 10xLogisticsExperts (@Logisticsexpert) April 11, 2020"

The next morning I opened the Wall Street Journal to an article (Posted at midnight and my tweet was at 10:40pm) titled  "Will We Forgive Amazon When This is Over"  by Christopher Mims (@Mims, Christopher.mims@wsj.com) (May be Paywall).  The theme is the same:  At precisely the moment we needed Amazon the most, the model failed and it failed big.  There are a couple of key areas where it failed and only one could really have been an "unknown unknown":

1. Merchandising and Inventory:  This is the big "unknown unknown" and we cannot hold Amazon or anyone fully responsible for this as no one could have seen the massive whipsaw / bullwhip which occurred with certain products.  We essentially had a "run on the bank" and ran out.
   
   However, the "bricks" portion was able to respond much faster through limiting amount someone can buy, "senior hours" and other tactics (Not the least of which is just public shame if you are walking out with cases of toilet paper).  Amazon just could not get ahead of this and still to this day are not ahead.  They essentially have shut down all other "non essential" product lines yet I can still get all that stuff through either BOPIS (Buy on line pick up in store) or just in store at the bricks.
   
2. No Customer Loyalty:  The big question for the e-commerce providers such as Amazon will be whether they invest a lot into their networks to support a crisis like this or do they chalk it up to a "once in a lifetime" crisis and assume everything goes back to normal.  I think it will not go back to normal and the pure e-commerce players will lose customers and not gain them. 
   
   Take the Amazon Prime program for example.  Many hundreds of thousands have paid for years into that program.  Yes, you get free delivery but it also is somewhat of a loyalty program as well.  As soon as the crisis hit, prime customers were thrown to the curb.  By doing that, many prime customers are asking themselves "What am I paying for" and now that they have had the experience of "bricks and clicks", these customers may never come back.  I would imagine Amazon will see a decrease in both Prime customers and customers overall.
   
3. The Technology Just Did Not Work:  This led to a massively poor customer experience that did not have to be.  In fact, prior to COVID19 most discussions I have been in have always started with, "If Amazon can do... (Kind of like, "If they can put a man on the moon why can't....)".  This will no longer be the case.  No one will want to replicate this.  I think most give them a pass on the inventory issues but why is their website so screwed up?  Why do I have to click 4 times before I find out either the product is out of stock, it is reserved for first responders or the delivery will be two months from now (Why would they even allow it to be displayed)?
   
   The purchase experience has been awful.  The great technology has gone haywire and their "hands off the steering wheel" AI systems failed at precisely the time they were needed.  I found websites of other "off line" stores to be far more helpful, far more accurate and far more useful.  Amazon is going to have reevaluate this entire problem.  Their technology just does not appear to be much better.
   
4. Counterfeiting:  One item the "bricks" stores have is brand reputation.  Nothing makes it into a Home Depot, Lowes, Target, or Wal-Mart store without it being properly vetted to safety, service and functionality.  The item has to perform as specified.  Yes, there will be some warranty claims but not complete failure.  The "E-Commerce" world, led by Amazon, has had this "endless aisle" approach and they purposefully do very little vetting.  They claim they are a "platform" not a store (Although I think this is mostly "lawyer speak" so they can defend in lawsuits).  This has led to massive counterfeits, items which are displayed but never fulfilled, , items which say they will be fulfilled but it may be 2 months from now etc. 
   
   What is worse is the e-commerce players want the "wisdom of the crowd" to sort through it all, figure it out with "star ratings" (Which are easily manipulated by the very people doing the counterfeiting) and then report them.  The e-commerce people want the buyer to be their merchandiser as well and not pay us.  Bad form.  

For all these reasons, I believe pure e-commerce will lose business and it will take them a long time to get it back.  The "old guard" businesses with store fronts, reputations and really good technology have won this round and a big round it was (and still is)!

Long term readers of mine will not be surprised by this as I wrote two posts a while ago about how the bricks and mortar should win because they can do everything Amazon can do and Amazon cannot do everything they do.  I welcomed WalMart up from their long slumber (June 26, 2017) when they finally committed heavily to e-commerce.  I then wrote a post on June 3, 2018 titled: Convinced Even More That Wal-Mart Should Be The Winner Against Amazon.  

Thoughts on Retailers Buying XPO Logistics and What The Right Strategy Should Be

I generally do not like to comment on something so speculative however Friday ended with a huge bang in the supply chain industry with Amazon and a major retailer apparently thinking of buying XPO logistics.  I was asked by many what I thought of this so let me give you some pre-holiday thoughts:

First, this is a very normal activity as companies go upstream and downstream in the value chain to try to capture as much as they can in that chain.  Remember your business classes:  The value chain starts essentially at the extraction of raw materials and ends with the consumer (some say it goes through post consumption disposal and return of unconsumed raw materials to Mother Earth.  I agree with that however let's leave that alone for now.).  In between extraction and consumer you have activities such as transport of raw materials, conversion of raw materials to something of value, transportation to distribution, merchandising (either on line or in store) and final mile delivery (whether completed by the consumer or completed by the seller) to the point of use (the home).

Three things you will notice in that scenario:

1. Conversion is very specific to a good.  Meaning, it is not fungible and if you wanted to capture that portion of the value chain you would have to buy a lot of companies.  You may want to vertically integrate a very high margin company but not all of it.
2. Transportation is pervasive across the value chain all the way back to the raw materials movements to the final mile.
3. Delivery Final mile (v. customer pick up) is growing rapidly and it touches the consumer.  This makes Final Mile transportation part of the merchandising and consumer touch point process - and this is why retailers want to vertically integrate. The impact of final mile on the consumer experience and consumer loyalty is huge.  

There is one other dynamic happening right now and that is the current capacity crunch.  Rather than get into an "arms race" of ever increasing rates, the retailer may decide to just buy their own capacity and this is another reason to get the "Elephant Gun" out and look for carriers to buy.  

If the retailer is thinking they want to capture the final mile and protect themselves against the capacity crunch, they could do a number of things:

1. Buy technology to facilitate the final mile but not buy the assets.  Think Target's acquisition of Grand Junction.  Or their more recent acquisition of Shipt for grocery shipping.  Even Wal-Mart's acquisition of Jet.com would be part of facilitating this process.  (The biggest issue with the Wal-Mart acquisition was one of culture - Wal-Mart eliminated Jet's long standing practicing of having drinks and happy hours in the office.  That since has been reinstated).
2. Buy transportation assets and make them "in house" assets.  This is where the discussion of buying XPO comes in.
3. Build the transportation assets yourself - i.e., Amazon's acquisition of planes and doing "power only" where Amazon owns the trailers, are examples of this.  Many retailers follow this power only model.  The benefit of this is you can swap carriers pretty quickly and you can leverage small carriers since the retailer owns the trailer.  The problem with this strategy is the "crunch" is with the power not with the trailer.
4. Develop "Vested" relationships which give the specific retailer "most favored nation" status with one or more asset providers.  While this idea is championed by Kate Vitasek at University of Tennessee (read about this concept at The Vested Way) it really was "founded" in the logistics industry by the infamous J.B. Hunt agreement with the BNSF.  This gave J.B. Hunt a preferred status with BNSF which, to this day, makes it impossible for other carriers to really compete with JBH.  For the most part, the rest of the industry fights over what JBH does not want.  If JBH wants it, they win. 
5. Work within financial risk mitigation constructs. An interesting new development is to protect capacity (does not really help with final mile) by participating in the new futures exchange developed by Craig Fuller called TransRisk.  This will definitely assist with the stabilization of rates and capacity however it is at least one year away from implementation  and, while I absolutely think it will work, it is unproven.  

There are hybrids of all of these however these are the major actions a retailer could take to capture more of the value in the value chain and mitigate capacity risk.  Number 2 above, Buy Assets, has garnished all the excitement going into Christmas weekend.  My quick thoughts:

1. No one is buying XPO and if they did the Government would stop it.  XPO, as it currently is constructed, is too big and would have too big of an impact on industry assets to allow one retailer or on-line provider to buy it.
2. They could split XPO up and buy pieces of it.  While this would probably make it easier to get through government regulators, I believe this action would be value destroying not value creating.  For example, the final mile portion of XPO was created by XPO acquiring a company called 3PD.  3PD are executives who came out of retail and therefore just "putting it back" could be possible.  Combine 3PD with the final mile technology of Optima (which is a final mile technology company XPO purchased back in 2013) and you may have a platform for a good final mile service.
   
   However, don't forget, neither XPO, 3PD or Optima own the transportation assets. They merely find, qualify and route.  The "work" is still outsourced to smaller delivery companies and therefore this would be more of an example of buy technology  (along with getting very good people) versus buying transportation assets.
   
   The big question this would leave is what happens to the rest of XPO?  Is it just a carcass laying out there to be pecked at by private equity investors? Does Brad Jacobs still run it?  Are the pieces as valuable as the whole?  I think not.  I think the value of each piece of XPO diminishes significantly as other pieces get sold off. This is why I believe splitting XPO up would be value destroying not value creating (unless, of course, the buyer of a piece is willing to either pay a huge premium for the portion they buy or be willing to immediately divest of certain portions of the "carcass")

I think the logical action for retailers is to concentrate heavily on #1 (Buy Technology) along with #4

 (Develop Vested Relationships).  I would also heavily participate in #5 (Work within financial risk mitigation constructs) once it becomes available. 

Interestingly, and somewhat off the radar, this is what Target appears to be doing (after hiring Preston Mosier and Arthur Valdez from Amazon).  Perhaps everyone, including Amazon, should be focused more on what is happening in Minnesota.

Have a very happy holiday season!

The Stay at Home Economy and Its Supply Chain Impacts - Part 1: Definition

I have noticed a bit about my own behavior and started looking to see if it was just me or was it a "trend" (I am not usually "trendy").  The behavior is simple:  I just stay at home more and I have made my home a bit of a "Disneyland".  Rather than go out for entertainment, I have it brought to me. Instead of going out to buy things, I had them brought to me.  To listen to music, for example,  I merely plug into an amp and headphones and through the power of Amazon, Spotify or Pandora I have just about every song ever recorded at my fingertips.  This is The Stay at Home Economy.

The Stay at Home Economy (SAHE for now on) is something that has huge impact on how our supply chains work.  First, lets explore why this is growing:

1. Technology: I have written a lot about how technology miniaturized or digitized just about everything and it continues at a rapid pace.  My music, my video and my books are all digitized so I get them on demand and in digital devices.  No need to shop or go to a central place to watch or listen.  In fact, my home theater and home audio equipment rivals that of professional locations.
2. Customization: Because virtually everything is available with the touch of a button, I essentially customize my experience to an audience of one - me.  Before, I would have to compromise and listen, watch or do some activity that perhaps was not exactly what I wanted to do.  Now, I do exactly what I want to do. 
3. Control of the Temporal Aspect of Activity: I do what I want (see #2 above) when I want. I no longer have to worry about "start" times or what day of week I am doing something.  I do what I want and when I want to do it. 
4. Food Delivery: This is the last bastion of home delivery e-commerce and it is coming. It is far more complex but with companies building "Meals ready to eat" (No, not the MRE's from the Army days but companies such as Blueapron) and with your local supermarket delivering, the last "big" reason to go out is starting to go away.  
5. Security: This is an unfortunate part of life these days but it is a fact - the more the aggregation of people occur at events, the more risk there is.  Why take that risk?  When I am at home I feel far more secure. 

All of these reasons lead to the idea of "Mass Customization" which has been a dream for a long time.  No longer do you have to produce a product, service or experience for the "masses" but rather you can offer a large amount of individual items and let the customer aggregate these things into the experience they want - when they want it.  

This is the SAHE and you can already imagine the impacts of this on your supply chain.  If you are not letting people customize experiences or products or you are not building a really compelling reason why someone should leave their home to go to your location, you are going to lose.  

This is also the much bigger reason why Amazon is winning - they have built out an experience, a catalog and customization capabilities for the SAHE.  One might even say they are the store for the SAHE.  It is not just a fancy website and big warehouses.  They are actually building out an ecosystem which supports the SAHE. 

Jim Cramer reported on this on his Mad Money Show and said (from Seeking Alpha):

"When Domino's Pizza (NYSE:DPZ) crushed earnings and Target (NYSE:TGT) got hammered, Cramer is convinced that the stay-at-home economy is getting strong. 

The comparisons between these two stocks are perfect metaphors for the current environment. Stocks such as Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZN), Netflix (NASDAQ:NFLX) and Domino's allow people to stay at home and save money as well. Domino's delivers pizzas to you at home while Target requires you to leave the house. 

The bricks and mortars are losing in a world where consumers see stay-at-home as an advantage. This also means that companies like Home Depot (NYSE:HD) and TJX Companies (NYSE:TJX) are rallying as they make the home better. 

Netflix, Amazon and the likes have made entertainment reach home, when you want, how you want it. Gaming companies create engaging video games which people play at home. With social media, consumers are aware what's going on and do not need to leave the house. It's just that things are different now compared to how they were 10 years ago. The stay-at-home economy is touching every aspect of people's lives and it's not going to change soon."

I think it is clear the SAHE is here to stay and it is dramatically changing how people behave and shop.  My next entry will be on the implications of your supply chain - Hint:  If you are not working to support the SAHE you are quickly becoming obsolete.


  Note:  I am not making any value judgment pro or con on the SAHE - that is for social scientists and psychologists to develop.  I am merely reporting what is clearly happening and the impact on supply chains.  

Supply Chain Talent As Competitive Advantage - Traction

I recently published a posting about the Ascendency of Supply Chain and the proof point I used was Amazon suing Target over "poaching" of supply chain talent.  20 years ago no one cared about hiring someone from supply chain.  Now it is seen as "stealing competitive secrets".

Well, the good news is the Wall Street Journal has caught on to this and after my post, Loretta Chao wrote her own well written article titled: Supply-Chain Lawsuits Mount Amid Drive For Logistics Talent.  You should read it.