What does the FMCG giant Unilever have in common with grocery retailer The Kroger and a luxury watch brand Audemars Piguet?
The answer is Retail-as-a-Service (RaaS).
Unilever worked with JD.com to distribute goods to both online and physical stores in China, while Audemars Piguet launched its pop-up store on WeChat. In the US, food store The Kroger partnered with Microsoft to increase the level of personalization and productivity in their stores.
The term ‘RaaS’ has clamoring over the headlines over the years, but what exactly is Retail-as-a-Service?
What Is Retail-as-a-Service and Why Is It Becoming a Trend?
An analyst from Kantar Retail, Stephen Mader, defines the Retail-as-a-Service model as when “retailers build open platforms and toolkits that enable brands and third-party sellers to connect with shoppers directly through a physical store”.
Having an abundance of data in hands, these retailers bundle up services, customer data, technology, and its expertise to offer brands a service.
The emergence of ecommerce has reduced the in-store retail visits by billions in the US and part of the reason is because the experience offered by a traditional physical store is no longer enough for the savvy consumers. Besides shopping for products, consumers are slowly and surely seeking an experience when they’re out visiting the store.
“Nearly 3,800 stores are expected to close their doors by year’s end, and the brands that do survive will have done so by creating engrossing experiences.”
In order for the brands to maximize the potential of offline stores effectively, they need to provide engaging experiences to keep the consumers hooked. For example, Sephora combined activities that are completely unrelated to making a purchase into its app, while Samsung’s pop-up store was set up to allows consumers test its technology and experience rather than to focus on sale.
The trend also drives the growth of RaaS platform startups that provide an easy, cost-effective solution to brands wanting to launch physical stores.
In the US, a “Retail as-a-Service” startup b8ta has helped retailers such as Macy’s, Lowe’s, and 15 other consumer brands to set up pop-up stores and physical shops, incorporating technologies and cutting-edge gimmicks to traditional physical retailers.
Chicago-based Leap recently secured $3 million in funding to offer an end-to-end service — that ranges from staffing, experiential design, tech integration, and day-to-day operations — to help digital brands to launch a brick-and-mortar store.
Meanwhile, Fourpost is focusing on providing a ready-to-use retail space for digital native brands looking to open a physical store in the US, lowering the barrier of entry in terms of both capital and time. Each of these companies is tackling the problems that usually came with setting up an offline store and elevate the consumer experience.
“If you shop in one of our stores, you will feel different because we have gone to such a great length to remove the idea of your visit being about buying a product.” – Vibhu Norby, the co-founder and CEO of b8ta.
With over 70 locations, B8ta’s store allows brands to place their merchants and train shop assistants while gaining revenue from space rental and subscription fees from brands; Retail Dive
JD.com spurns the growth of RaaS in Asia
Chinese ecommerce giant JD.com is a big advocate of the strategy.
One of JD.com’s latest initiative to establish RaaS is the partnership with Chinese retailer Better Life. JD.com was also one of the first retailers to develop a mini ecommerce program on WeChat. To date, JD.com has developed and bundled up its marketing, logistics, financial services, and big data as a service and leverage these capabilities to help over 2,000 brands and its merchants.
JD.com also partnered with Google to develop next-generation retail infrastructure solutions by combining JD.com’s supply chain and logistics expertise and Google’s technology strengths.
All of these were the result of JD.com’s mission to go forward by scaling its technology in order to outsource its developments to third-party retailers around the world. Chen Zhang, Chief Technology Officer at JD.com says that making money is not their priority at this stage as he believes that:
“With Scalability, comes profit”
Taking the burgeoning amount of investment coming from China to the region into consideration, it’s only a matter of time for RaaS to kick off in Southeast Asia.
In Indonesia, JD.com has already started the concept on its unmanned store JD.ID X Mart. The store collected data that can be used to understand shopping behavior and optimize inventory, product displays, and other aspects of store management and marketing.
With JD.com’s joint-venture in Thailand, it’s fair to assume that the market will be the next destination for the innovation. And although Alibaba’s Lazada has been quiet on the front, looking at the fierce competition between the companies in the mainland, it seems like a matter of time until Alibaba does so.
Inside JD.ID X Mart in Indonesia. It is JD.com’s first unmanned store outside of China and it is a demonstration of JD.com’s mission to implement RaaS; Pandaily
With the ‘offline is the new online’ trend carried over to 2019, we can expect to see more traditional retailers offering their service and retail space to help online brands expanding their reach and getting more foot traffic in return.
A win-win strategy for the ever-changing landscape of retail.
https://ecommerceiq.asia/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/retailforrent.jpg6321024Pathttp://ecommerceiq.asia/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/EIQ-LOGO332x55px.pngPat2019-01-30 15:49:212019-01-30 15:49:52Earning Back Its Spot: Offline Stores Makes a Comeback as RaaS Strategy Redefines Retail
Chinese ecommerce platform JD is lesser known amongst international audiences, but its mid-annual 618 shopping festival generated almost $25 billion in gross merchandise value this past June. The company has a 33% share of China’s B2C ecommerce market and generates more direct revenues than Alibaba. Google’s latest $550 million strategic investment in the company is the latest in a series of partnerships JD has orchestrated, as it seeks to challenge Alibaba and Amazon for ecommerce dominance in both China and the rest of the world.
JD’s Direct Retailing Model Gives it a Strong Competitive Advantage
JD’s business model is distinct from that of Alibaba’s in that it is a direct retailer – meaning that it purchases inventory wholesale and sells products directly to individual customers, rather than simply acting as an intermediary between buyers and sellers. Approximately 92% of its business comes from direct sales, whereas for Amazon this figure hovers around 50%.
JD stocks its own inventory in its vast proprietary network of nearly 500 warehouses across China, each of which is situated strategically close to consumers to ensure fast delivery. JD also employs an in-house delivery force of over 65,000 warehousing and delivery workers. During the 618 festival this year, JD was able to deliver 90% of its goods within two days.
This dedication to customer service requires a significant amount of capital to sustain, but JD has been able to stand out from its competitors.
JD claws its way up to a 33% market share in an industry where Alibaba was previously thought to be unbeatable.
Richard Liu, CEO of JD.com delivering goods during their ‘618’ Mid Year Sales Source: Internet
The Borderless Retail Alliance
To compete with Alibaba, JD has enlisted the help of numerous partners. In China, this includes internet giants Tencent and Baidu, in addition to its partnerships with the likes of vertical-focused ecommerce platforms Vipshop and Meili Inc. Tencent owns 18% of JD’s shares and partnered with JD to invest $864 million in China’s third largest ecommerce platform Vipshop this past December. JD made its claim to fame by selling electronics to a predominantly male user base, and such partnerships with Vipshop and Meili, both of which sell a combination of apparel and cosmetics, help the company appeal to a broader female base.
America’s largest retailer Wal-Mart owns 10% of JD’s shares and has been a strategic partner since 2016 when it first sold its ecommerce division Yihaodian to JD Google, despite having a limited presence in the China market, announced a $550 million investment in JD this past June. Both of these strategic partnerships will be key as JD prepares to expand its business overseas.
Google’s Data Will Help JD Catch Up Overseas
Ecommerce platforms such as JD spend an enormous amount of money on search ads every year, to ensure that their products show up in search results. As they grow bigger, however, internet users can go directly to ecommerce platforms to search for products, which presents a threat to Baidu’s and Google’s search ads business. Partnering with JD allows Google to hedge against this problem.
Google’s extensive ecommerce data can give JD better insights into the buying behavior of users, and JD will have a better idea of how to target users via Google’s broad ads network. This will be a significant asset as it attempts to catch up with local competitors in Southeast Asia, Europe, and the US.
Wal-Mart and JD Make the Perfect Couple
US retail giant Wal-Mart has been partners with JD since 2016 when it sold its online business Yihaodian to JD in exchange for a 5% equity stake worth $1.5 billion. That stake has since grown to 10%. In China, Wal-Mart leverages JD’s marketplace and users to sell directly to Chinese consumers online, complementing its offline business in the country. For JD, Wal-Mart is a key supplier for the JD Daojia platform, which is an on-demand delivery service that delivers groceries to customers within a one-hour time frame.
JD also sells its goods offline in Wal-Mart stores and uses them as distribution centers from which last-mile delivery can be carried out. Since JD is an online retailer without many offline retail stores, the addition of Wal-Mart’s physical locations across China is a considerable asset as it looks to expand its user base via omnichannel marketing strategies. JD is planning to expand to the US market by the end of this year, and the potential expansion of this partnership model means that JD may have a chance to catch up with Amazon, especially since the two can leverage economies of scale and source goods in bulk.
JD Dao Jia partnered with Wal-Mart on sales promotion Source: Internet
JD Goes Global
With an impressive set of partnerships under its belt, JD has the capability to challenge Alibaba and, potentially Amazon, on the global stage. JD has already set up international ecommerce site Joybuy in Spain this year and is looking to expand to Germany. JD has also launched local websites in Thailand and Indonesia under the JD brand. JD has publicly announced its intention to enter the US market by the end of 2018, with a beachhead office located in Los Angeles. The company plans to undercut its competitors and also help Chinese brands like Xiaomi expand to the US.
While it is still early stages, what is certain is that JD’s global expansion will be very interesting to watch going forward.
https://ecommerceiq.asia/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/JD-China.jpg7201092Pathttp://ecommerceiq.asia/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/EIQ-LOGO332x55px.pngPat2018-08-09 16:24:462018-08-09 16:33:46JD is Gearing Up to Contend for Global Retail Dominance
Pinduoduo, or PDD, is a social commerce app founded by Colin Huang, an ex-Google engineer, in September 2015. Only a couple of years old, PDD has become the fastest growing ecommerce company in China. It raised $100 million in 2017, is backed by China’s Banyan Capital and Tencent, and valued at a whopping $1.5 billion.
As of Feb 21, 2018, PDD ranks #3 overall in the Chinese iTunes app store ranking for free apps, after popular apps like Tik Tok (Douyin) and WeChat, and ahead of other shopping apps like Taobao. PDD went from 100 million yuan ($16 million) GMV a month in early 2016 to 4 billion yuan ($630 million) GMV a month by 2017, putting it in fourth place behind Alibaba, JD and Vipshop.
How does Pinduoduo work?
Users can download the PDD app or access it within WeChat. Like any ecommerce platform, PDD offers products across a wide range of categories from food to fashion. However, unlike Tmall and JD, PDD incentivizes users with discounts to invite friends to buy in groups.
For example, one container of Similac Advance Infant Formula Powder costs 59 yuan if you buy alone but only 35.5 yuan if you can get one other person to buy it too. In the screenshot below, a total of 1,822 pairs have “group-purchased” this item already.
In addition to group discounts, PDD also incentivizes customer acquisition. Getting users to follow the PDD WeChat Official Account, install the app, and sign up via WeChat login will earn them free products.
PDD also offers cash red envelopes worth 5-20 yuan to users for each friend they get to download the app and register. The entire system is then gamified through a public leaderboard.
Wait, is this new? Didn’t Groupon invent social commerce?
Groupon did arguably pioneer the group buying concept. In its early days, a certain number of users had to sign up for the same deal in order for everyone to receive the voucher. But unlike PDD, there wasn’t a direct incentive; users had to sit back and wait for anonymous users to tip the scale.
This mechanism was quickly abandoned to scale faster with minimum thresholds that acted more like gimmicks.
Groupon was labeled “social commerce” at first but in its later years, lost its social aspect.
Source: wiredtech on Flickr.com
Let’s take a step back and look at the definition of social commerce, according to ConversionXl:
“Social commerce is defined as the ability to make a product purchase from a third-party company within the native social media experience.”
Groupon emerged in the pre-mobile age of 2008 when most consumers still transacted via desktop, especially in the company’s US home market. Back then, less than 1% of ecommerce transactions were via mobile acquisition channels.
In addition, the company’s main distribution channel was email newsletters, a slow and high-friction medium and payments weren’t seamless either as users relied on a credit card or PayPal.
Now looking at 2016 in China – PDD’s first full year in operation – WeChat is the country’s dominant “super app” and leading medium to socialize online with 889 million Monthly Active Users (MAUs) by year end.
71% of ecommerce now takes place on mobile, creating a flattering backdrop for the rapid rise of PDD, which started out as an app on WeChat.
Paying for products on PDD is also remarkably easy because the app makes it automatic. After the first payment, users can opt for one-click payment via WeChat Pay that don’t require passwords.
Desktop usage, clunky email newsletters, and credit card payments limited Groupon’s true social commerce potential. Where Groupon failed, PDD is succeeding because of an ecosystem of mobile-first users and WeChat’s features that make it a super app.
Will PDD come to Southeast Asia?
Why not? Southeast Asia ecommerce is already being carved up by Alibaba and Tencent. Lazada and Tokopedia, two companies owned and invested in by Alibaba, dominate the B2C and C2C space on one end and Tencent-invested JD, Shopee, and Go-Jek are on the other end.
With Southeast Asia’s horizontal ecommerce market being consolidated into a few properties like Lazada, Tokopedia, JD and Shopee, there isn’t as much opportunity in the space as before.
New ecommerce players have to focus on dominating a specific, vertical category or provide a competitive advantage through means other than outspending peers in advertising and/or coupon subsidies.
This is where a model like PDD fits snuggly.
It also helps that one of PDD’s biggest investors is Tencent, which already has its eyes set on the rapidly growing Southeast Asian market.
Will the PDD business model work in Southeast Asia?
To determine if the PDD model would work in the region, we need to identify the criteria that were conducive to its success in China:
1. Lack of distribution channels / expensive distribution channels
If you strip away all the hype, PDD’s competitive advantage is in its customer acquisition strategy. Instead of relying on expensive channels like display advertising or paid search (e.g. Baidu ads), PDD is paying its users to get more users. For example, CPCs alone on Baidu can range from 5 to 25 yuan. Note these are clicks, not even users acquired.
Southeast Asia (excl. Singapore and Malaysia) is very similar to China in terms of lack of channels, due to a similar “no-tail” ecosystem. Whereas entrepreneurs in China had to pick their poison between Baidu, Sina and Sohu back in the day, startups in emerging Southeast Asia are limited to Facebook Ads, Google Search, and portals like Detik in Indonesia and Sanook in Thailand.
Early entrants like Lazada took advantage of low cost-per-clicks (CPCs) back in 2013 but given the raging ecommerce “bloodbath”, online ad CPCs have gone through the roof.
Having saturated online channels, Lazada started exploring offline advertising channels like TV and out-of-home media.
Others like Pomelo Fashion tapped into physical stores as a more cost-efficient way to acquire users and simplify last-mile logistics.
PDD social and viral customer acquisition strategies could work quite well.
2. High mobile commerce penetration
The majority of ecommerce transactions in China now take place on mobile. In 2016, 71% of ecommerce GMV was on mobile. In the US, this number was only 20% in 2016.
In Southeast Asia, companies like Lazada and Shopee today see over 65% of their orders coming from mobile (with 21.6% using both mobile and desktop to shop), according to a recent survey by ecommerceIQ.
Needless to say, high mobile penetration in Southeast Asia along with high mobile ecommerce usage will provide a fertile ground for a business model like PDD to gain traction here.
3. Frictionless mobile payments
One of the drivers of PDD’s success is its seamless payments through WeChat Pay.
This will be a challenge for PDD in Southeast Asia as only Singapore and Malaysia are credit card dominated whereas the rest of the region is mainly a cash-on-delivery market.
Despite efforts to come up with a universal mobile payment standard, no one has succeeded as of today. Efforts like Sea’s AirPay, Ascend’s True Pay, and LINE Pay have hit a wall due to lack of distribution, lack of use case, and a plethora of other issues.
Right now, most eyes are on Go-Jek’s Go-Pay, which has a massive distribution channel by leveraging Go-Jek’s 40 million install base and 10 million Weekly Active Users (WAUs). In addition, and more importantly, Go-Jek addresses emerging Southeast Asia’s unique lack of both credit card and bank account penetration — users are able to top up their Go-Pay accounts by handing cash to Go-Jek drivers that essentially act like mobile ATM deposit machines.
While still a poor-man’s WeChat Pay, Go-Pay offers hope for business models like that of PDD to thrive in Southeast Asia.
4. Attachment to popular social platform
Without the WeChat ecosystem, PDD wouldn’t have been the company it is today. Being embedded in WeChat, PDD was able to quickly get massive distribution by tapping into the potential 889 million MAUs of WeChat.
In Southeast Asia, Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and LINE are highly popular, however, none are considered super apps that offer seamless integration.
The closest to WeChat in Southeast Asia would probably be Indonesia’s Go-Jek.
While Go-Jek hasn’t entered ecommerce yet (it’s positioned only as a services marketplace and offers delivery for partners through its GO-MART product), it wouldn’t be surprising if PDD decided to leverage the Go-Jek platform, given the similarities to WeChat in China. Like PDD, Go-Jek also counts Tencent as an investor.
With an estimated third of ecommerce in markets like Thailand happening on Facebook, Instagram and LINE, the user behavior of buying through social channels already exists.
If you browse through PDD, you’ll notice that most of the products sold bear similarities to many of those sold on Taobao. In other words, a lot of “mass” and non-branded products. PDD thrives in China because of easy access to a supply of these products manufactured locally.
However, in Southeast Asia, these kind of products (typically sold on social media and C2C platforms) are imported from China, which leaves less margin for PDD to play with in terms of discounts and customer acquisition.
To sum up, emerging Southeast Asia meets several of the criteria behind PDD’s success in China but poses some unique challenges:
What will happen next?
In the analysis, we’ve identified some of the drivers of PDD’s rapid rise in China and also their presence in emerging Southeast Asian markets at an earlier stage.
Given this opportunity, we can expect the following scenarios to play out over the next few months and years:
1. Local and Chinese entrepreneurs will launch PDD clones across the region
Ever since opening up to the world in the 80s, we can describe China having gone through the following three stages, with the third one still progressing as we speak:
1. Made-in-China (1980-2000)
China perceived as manufacturing base for (often cheap, low-quality) export products
2. Copy-to-China (2000-2015)
Chinese entrepreneurs, some foreign educated, bring back models that worked in the US, e.g. Search (Google -> Baidu), Portals (Yahoo -> Sina, Sohu)
3. Copy-from-China (2015-2030)
Birth of unique Chinese Internet business models (e.g. bike-sharing, payments, live streaming, social commerce, O2O). Increasing media focus on Chinese tech innovation and locals outside of China looking for Chinese models to copy
We are witnessing stage 3 happening right here in Southeast Asia. Below is a Thai post on Facebook looking to recruit staff to work on what looks like a PDD clone:
It doesn’t have to be local talent copying PDD from China to Southeast Asia. With the influx of Alibaba, Tencent and JD into the region, there are plenty of Chinese employees who’ll be noticing the similarities between Southeast Asia today and China, and jump on new opportunities.
2. PDD will enter Indonesia through Go-Jek (helped by common investor Tencent)
If PDD were to follow Alibaba and Tencent’s steps and enter Southeast Asia, we expect them to join forces with Go-Jek. By embedding itself inside Go-Jek, PDD is executing the same game plan that led to its rapid initial growth within the WeChat ecosystem. Fostered by a shared investor — Tencent — Go-Jek would be the perfect launch partner for PDD in Southeast Asia.
3. Existing players will adopt the PDD business model to compete against horizontal ecommerce plays
Local ecommerce players like MatahariMall, Konvy, and Orami could pre-empt PDD by adopting its customer acquisition strategies to compete with regional giants like Lazada and Shopee.
For Konvy and Orami, two female-focused ecommerce platforms, this move could make a lot of sense since the majority of PDD’s users in China are female, over 40 year old, and living in smaller cities.
https://ecommerceiq.asia/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/colin.png555840Pathttp://ecommerceiq.asia/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/EIQ-LOGO332x55px.pngPat2018-02-23 15:45:342018-02-23 17:05:30China’s Fastest Growing Ecommerce Startup is One You’ve Probably Never Heard of
You might recognize a signature Burberry trench coat because of its distinctive check pattern.
When Burberry first came to life in London in 1856, CEO & founder Thomas Burberry was, at the time, only 21 years of age. The brand focused solely on outdoor attire in its early days but quickly established a reputation for quality and longevity.
In 1879, Burberry received a patent for its ‘gabardine’ fabric – a water-resistant, breathable material that it would use for trench coats. The company went from strength to strength, opening a store in the upscale Haymarket area of London in 1891, designing its signature equestrian knight logo in 1901, and supplying outdoor attire to South Pole expeditioners in 1911.
Burberry’s popularity skyrocketed after its trench coats were used by British infantry forces during the First World War. An outpour of patriotism boosted its brand identity with members of the public clamoring to buy the products after the end of the war.
Further validation came in the form of high profile celebrity endorsements by movie stars such as Humphrey Bogart in Casablanca, Audrey Hepburn in Breakfast at Tiffany’s, and Peter Sellers in Pink Panther.
The UK luxury brand is best known for its sharp coats and jackets but has also ventured out in designing shoes, scarves, bags, & other accessories. By the mid-1980s as a result of spreading itself too thin and chasing short-term profitability goals, the brand started to stagnate. What happened?
The makings of a crisis
The 70s and 80s were rewarding for Burberry in terms of its bottom line. It signed licensing agreements with many global manufacturers to design suits, trousers, shirts, and accessories and distributed them via independent retailers as well as its own stores. The effect of this expansion i.e. higher operating profits was felt well into the 1990s.
But the licensing partnerships also had an unintended effect: counterfeit products flooded markets across the world, particularly in Asia, causing price disparities that existed even in original products.
Western countries were subjected to higher rates and items were often rerouted back to markets; for example, cheaper bags in Asia were exported back to Europe resulting in a blow to its image.
Burberry had severely diluted the power of its brand by adopting a mass-market route. Once associated with list-A celebrities and daring thrill seekers, Burberry had rapidly lost its aura of glitz and glam.
Shockingly, the elitist brand was now equated with thuggery, chicanery, and hooliganism; adopted en-masse by ‘Chavs’ – a pejorative British term used to describe degenerates and lowlifes. Bouncers would turn away people wearing Burberry outfits as it was assumed they would cause trouble once inside.
“Burberry was not able to identify its target group of consumers because of its uneven distribution and licensing policies in different countries of operation,” says Arittra Basu, business development manager at Westin Hotels.
The long road to redemption started in the late 1990s after Burberry hired Rosie Marie Bravo to steer the ship. She immediately tried to stem the decline by reducing the company’s footprint in Asia, ending price disparities, and appointing a new creative head to reestablish the brand’s core values.
In 2006, Angela Ahrendts was appointed the new CEO and began a journey leading the company to reemerge as a force to be reckoned with.
Initially, there were subtle design changes. The check pattern was scaled back and started to appear less and less on merchandise. Stringent measures were adopted to crackdown on counterfeit items and the licensing agreements were gradually rescinded to centralize design and operations under one roof.
But the most important decision made by Ahrendts, along with Chief Creative Officer Christopher Bailey was the declaration of their vision to see Burberry as the world’s first fully digital luxury company.
The brand had, in their opinion, appealed to an older clientele for far too long. It was time to catch the attention of suave and fashionable millennials.
Digital would be central to the brand’s way of thinking and customers would be treated to the same experience whether online or in-store.
One of the most popular campaigns Burberry launched was the ‘Art of the Trench’, a unique play on user-generated content to bring consumers at the forefront.
This was a standalone website where customers were encouraged to upload photos of themselves wearing their trench coats. They were featured on the main page for 15 minutes and customers could share these photos on social media feeds. There was also an option to click on a product and be redirected to Burberry’s main site to purchase it.
The campaign was a resounding success. In 2015, it was reported to have gained almost 25 million pageviews since launch.
Another hugely popular campaign was initiated to promote Burberry Kisses, a lipstick brand launched by the company. For this, it partnered with Google to enable users to send personal messages, sealed with a virtual kiss.
Users from 13,000 cities sent these virtual kisses within the first 10 days of launch.
In 2012, Burberry tried to bridge the gap between the online and offline shopping experience via its Regent Street London store. The store featured huge screens where catwalk shows around the world could be viewed live and the individual products were available for instant purchase.
“Burberry Regent Street brings our digital world to life in a physical space for the first time, where customers can experience every facet of the brand through immersive multimedia content exactly as they do online,” said Burberry CEO Angela Ahrendts. “Walking through the doors is just like walking into our website.”
Not only can shoppers buy online from Burberry’s digital properties, they can also choose to pick up in-store or have a sales associate order from the website for them while visiting an outlet. Burberry’s also experimented with flash commerce features via Twitter as well as allowing users in China to order via WeChat.
In China Burberry took the unusual route of opening a store on Tmall; a strategy consistently avoided by upscale brands. The move was meant to counter the growing grey market for its goods as well as embrace the Chinese penchant for online shopping.
Its savvy use of social media has also engendered the growth of a loyal community. The brand has embraced Snapchat to provide peeks into upcoming lines and fashion shows. Burberry’s YouTube channel has over 300,000 subscribers and hundreds of videos that not only showcase trench coats, but also includes makeup tutorials, music jams, and other engaging content.
And the result of all of this? In 2011 Business Insider placed Burberry in the top 10 brands of the world with a growth percentage of 86% as judged by an estimate of its brand value. That far outstripped any other company on the list.
Burberry shares, which languished in the $200 range in 2002 now trade at $1,539.
Of course, challenges persist. Weakening demand for luxury brands hurt Burberry’s profitability last year with the CEO saying that the product range “needs to be refreshed”.
But if it continues with its sharp focus on digital and out-of-the-box thinking, it should be able to weather the relative storm.
“Burberry’s digital strategy […] has so far not only put it at the top of the fashion luxury category but among top players across industries,” wrote Digiday.
https://ecommerceiq.asia/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/5569994499_06f11de82e_b.jpg6821024Pathttp://ecommerceiq.asia/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/EIQ-LOGO332x55px.pngPat2018-02-20 13:11:092018-02-22 13:39:17How Burberry Saved its Brand by Focusing on Digital
As the year’s largest online sales campaigns wrap up, research from Google and Temasek predict Southeast Asia is well on its way towards becoming a digital powerhouse worth much more than $200 billion USD in eight short years. How did shoppers behave during Single’s Day in light of all the work poured into gaining their trust and promoting online shopping?
From exclusive updates provided by the companies to ecommerceIQ, here is how Google’s recent report correlates with real time results.
Lazada Group Single’s Day and Online Revolution:
Single’s Day (11.11) generated USD$123 million gross merchandise value (GMV), 171% year-on-year growth
Shoppers ordered 6.5 million items, 191% year-on-year growth
70% of orders were placed from mobile devices
Sells 12 limited edition Volkswagen Beetles within 20 minutes, each costing RM112,112 (USD$27,441) during Lazada Malaysia Online Revolution (12.12)
Apple products offered officially on Lazada as the brand’s authorised online reseller, opens shop-in-shop (SiS)
600% increase in cross-border product orders, 400% increase in total orders (compared to a regular day)
Most popular products: GPS, mobile accessories, smartphones, TV sets, theme park tickets
Traffic to the website doubled, 85% contributed by mobile
Shopee 9.9 Mobile Shopping Day
350% increase in orders, 500% increase in traffic
Most popular products: make up brushes, smart watches, canvas backpacks
7 million chats, 30,000 participating sellers
Highest number of items ordered by one buyer was 218
The results from this year’s mega sales campaigns work well with new predictions by Google & Temasek in their latest e-Conomy SEA Spotlight report:
Ecommerce sales of first-hand goods will reach $10.9 billion in GMV in 2017, up from $5.5 billion in 2015 (driven by top players like Lazada, Shopee, and Tokopedia)
Southeast Asia’s internet economy will reach $50 billion in 2017, growing at 27% CAGR
The region’s internet economy accounts for 2% of Southeast Asia’s GDP, will increase to 6% by 2025
There will be 330 million monthly active internet users by year end, 90% of which are smartphone users
Search interest for ecommerce brands growing more than two-fold in two years thanks to promotional activities and marketing investments by leading regional/global ecommerce players and co-marketing initiatives with top brands in electronics, fashion and consumer goods industries.
It’s shaping up to be a good end to 2017 for ecommerce players, investors and shoppers in Southeast Asia. Stay tuned for 2018 ecommerce predictions.
For more charts & graphs related to ecommerce in Southeast Asia, check out our database.
https://ecommerceiq.asia/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Online-Revolution-SEA-ecommerceIQ-2.jpg9691327Pathttp://ecommerceiq.asia/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/EIQ-LOGO332x55px.pngPat2017-12-13 10:56:522017-12-14 04:11:25How Did Southeast Asia’s Year End Ecommerce Campaigns Do? Single’s Day and Online Revolution Results Tell a Good Story
With the boom of technology in the region, Southeast Asia has become home to young startups, and investors hoping to help fuel its rapid growth.
Some examples of investment news surrounding the region only this year include Chinese ecommerce giant JD.com confirming a $500 million joint venture with Thai retailer Central to build up the ecommerce and fintech sector in Thailand; Malaysia Debt Ventures set aside a $238 million fund to target technology-based companies like AR, VR, etc; and 500 Startups has made its debut investment in Myanmar backing a social media monitoring and news discovery app.
A recent report commissioned by Google and AT Kearney also highlights just how much money has been funneled into the region, which market is the most attractive and where are the most deep-pocketed investors coming from.
Southeast Asia’s golden child
Although the investment for startup companies in Southeast Asia only contributed to 8% to the total $90 billion of investment into Asia, this value has grown 23 times from 2012 to 2016 from $0.3 billion to $6.8 billion.
Most of the money has been pumped into Singapore and Indonesia that captured 60% of the entire investment.
Singapore gained most of the startup investment in Southeast Asia
However, nothing shone brighter this year than the myriad of Indonesian startups that have been stealing the attention of global industry giants like Tencent, Expedia, and Tim Draper from Draper Associates who invested in the early days of Tesla, Baidu, and Skype.
The country has produced three startups that classify as a ‘unicorn’, a company valued at more than $1 billion. They are Traveloka, Tokopedia and Go-Jek.
The first is valued at $2 billion after a $350 million investment from Expedia in July, and both Tokopedia and Go-Jek also are worth around $1 billion and $3 billion respectively.
Where’s all the money coming from?
Attracting the Chinese investors
In a short span of four years time from 2012 to 2016, Indonesia has seen 31 times growth of investment value from $44 million to $1.4 billion. During 8 months in this year alone, this value has grown more than two times to $3 billion driven by later-stage investments.
The staggering growth has AT Kearney predicting the ecosystem could attract more investment than the oil and gas industry — which contributed $23.7 billion or 3.3% of the country’s GDP last year.
“Due to the massive growth, the value of startup investments in Indonesia may surpass the nation’s oil and gas investment which was $5 billion in 2016,” said AT Kearney partner, Alessandro Gazzini.
From all of the investment raised by Indonesian startups since 2012, ecommerce received the biggest chunk of gold taking 58% of the total investment value.
Transport and fintech quickly follow behind with 38% and 2% respectively.
Indonesia has also become a hotbed for the expansion of Chinese companies as the country sees a growing interest from Chinese investors this year.
94% of the startups investment in the country during 2017 have involved Chinese investors, up from only 2% last year. Two of the infamous Chinese BAT, Alibaba and Tencent, are raising stake in Indonesia by investing in Tokopedia and Go-Jek respectively.
Meanwhile, JD.com diversified its portfolios with investment in Traveloka making Indonesia the official battleground for Chinese companies to fight their proxy war.
The involvement of Chinese investors in Indonesia is something that the government has encouraged across all sectors. Indonesia’s Investment Coordinating has even set up a special China desk to attract more investors.
With the country still at a nascent digital stage, there is no precise measurement to find out the country’s true potential until company’s try but as the famed venture capitalist Tim Draper said about Indonesia, “it is a great place to be”.
https://ecommerceiq.asia/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/eIQ-Insights-CN-Investment.png6601140Pathttp://ecommerceiq.asia/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/EIQ-LOGO332x55px.pngPat2017-09-22 12:30:202017-10-27 12:38:53eIQ Data: 94% of Tech Investment in Indonesia Involved the Chinese in 2017