Posts

On June 28, 2018, Alibaba announced the launch of Taobao Xinxuan (淘宝心选), which translates to ‘Taobao Selected’. After a year in alpha testing, the company’s new concept is finally available to the wider public.

Through the website or one of two physical stores in Hangzhou and Shanghai, users can shop for affordable quality lifestyle and functional daily necessity goods including home fragrance, smart power sockets, underwear, and sonic-control toothbrushes.

ecommerceIQ

Rimowa?

According to TechNode, the recently opened store in Shanghai was raided and emptied by eager customers in a mere two hours.

What is Taobao Xinxuan?

Appearance wise, the Taobao Xinxuan concept will remind many of Japanese retailer Muji, whose clean and simplistic stores offer a wide range of quality and affordable clothing, stationery, bags, and even furniture.

ecommerceIQ

Taobao Xinxuan Store Concept Design

From a business model perspective, Taobao Xinxuan is actually more like Xiaomi, the smartphone-manufacturer-turned-global-electronics brand. Its Manufacturer-to-Consumer (M2C) approach and short supply chain allows the company to quickly go from the latest consumer insights to manufacturers to create products and achieve go-to-market in a few months.

ecommerceIQ

Xiaomi Flagship Store in Shanghai

ecommerceIQ

Xiaomi Flagship Store in Shanghai

Arguably, Taobao Xinxuan could be considered a clone of the M2C ecommerce platform launched by Chinese gaming company NetEase called Yanxuan. Since its release in 2016, Yanxuan has seen rapid growth in a unique vertical that avoids direct competition with Alibaba and JD.com.

The Yanxuan model can be described as an ODM (Original Design Manufacturer) model as well. By going directly to Chinese manufacturers creating products for established global brands, NetEase is able to get the same quality while selling at a much lower price by skipping over distributors.

ecommerceIQ

NetEase’s Yanxuan website

By targeting young, mainly urban consumers who value quality and design but are also price sensitive, Yanxuan has been able to achieve rapid growth in the Chinese ecommerce space. The company reached a monthly GMV (gross merchandise volume) of RMB 60 million (about US$9 million) by Q3 2016, only a few months after its initial launch. This allowed Yanxuan to break into the list of top 10 Chinese ecommerce platforms based on GMV.

ecommerceIQ

Yanxuan Home & Living Category

Alibaba’s New Trojan Horse?

For a business to execute the M2C model well, it needs to understand what consumers want and then act on it swiftly. Considered the pioneer in M2C in China, Xiaomi is well known for asking its users directly what they’d like to see in terms of new features and products.

Another company that knows what its users want is – surprise, surprise – Alibaba. Being the largest ecommerce company in China, Alibaba has extensive data on what brands and products people are buying and when and where. This doesn’t even include the additional data it gathers through its other businesses Ant Financial, Ali Health, and its offline Hema supermarkets and ‘New Retail’ initiatives.

Alibaba’s US counterpart Amazon hasn’t shied-away from using its data to introduce its own private label brands to compete directly with the other brands selling on its platform.

“The company now has roughly 100 private label brands for sale on its huge online marketplace, of which more than five dozen have been introduced in the past year alone. But few of those are sold under the Amazon brand. Instead, they have been given a variety of anodyne, disposable names like Spotted Zebra (kids clothes), Good Brief (men’s underwear), Wag (dog food) and Rivet (home furnishings).”

New York Times, ‘How Amazon Steers Shoppers to Its Own Products’

And this move by Amazon isn’t a small pilot project. Amazon private labels have a large impact on revenue:

“The results were stunning. In just a few years, AmazonBasics had grabbed nearly a third of the online market for batteries, outselling both Energizer and Duracell on its site.”

Amazon’s home court advantage gives it a leg up versus other brands:

“Take word searches. About 70 percent of the word searches done on Amazon’s search browser are for generic goods. That means consumers are typing in “men’s underwear” or “running shoes” rather than asking, specifically, for Hanes or Nike.

For Amazon, those word searches by consumers allow it to put its private-label products in front of the consumer and make sure they appear quickly. In addition, Amazon has the emails of the consumers who performed searches on its site and can email them directly or use pop-up ads on other websites to direct those consumers back to Amazon’s marketplace.”

Alibaba has been flying under the radar with regards to any private label initiatives, and for good reason. Unlike Amazon, which started out as a retailer buying and selling products, Alibaba’s Taobao and Tmall properties are pure marketplace plays from the beginning. Because Alibaba’s main goal is helping connect merchants and buyers via its platforms, a neutral stance is essential to the platform’s success.

It’s not surprising then that Alibaba decided to launch Xinxuan as ‘Taobao Xinxuan’ rather than ‘Tmall Xinxuan’. Originally a part of Taobao, Tmall spun off to provide a more premium B2B2C marketplace for authentic brands to sell their products online. Mixing in Xinxuan’s private label products would only upset brands competing in similar product categories.

Lazada’s LazMall a stepping stone towards introducing Lazada private label in Southeast Asia?

Last week, Lazada officially launched LazMall, its Southeast Asian version of Tmall. It’s a move towards splitting Lazada (‘b-to-C’) and LazMall (‘B-to-c’) and aims to offer a premium place for big brands to sell online, away from the grey market sellers on the platform.

ecommerceIQ

From the outside, this looks like an obvious move against JD, known to offer a better customer experience according to our recent Indonesia online marketplace survey.

However, seeing Alibaba’s new concept in China with Taobao Xinxuan, it’s not far-fetched the LazMall spin-off will lead to Lazada M2C private label brands in the near future.

The Chinese ecommerce market, being about 10 years ahead of the Southeast Asian one, acts like a crystal ball for brands operating in our region. Battle-tested brands with operations in China know better to diversify their channels before putting all their eggs into a single basket.

Southeast Asian-native brands are recommended to shake off their naivety and learn from China’s history.

Monogamy in ecommerce does not lead to happiness.

This is Part 2 of an article by Jeffrey Towson about the aspects of Alibaba’s “new retail” strategy.

In Part 1, I discussed uni-marketing and how the view of new retail for merchants and brands is very different than the view for consumers. A quick summary:

  • For consumers, the view is great. They are going to get what they want, where they want it and when they want it. New retail is a purification of demand.
  • For Alibaba, the view is spectacular. Their huge online marketplace is going to be merged with parts of the physical marketplace. The number of users and the amount of activity on their platform is going to increase dramatically.
  • But the view for merchants, brands, and retailers is more confusing. New retail upends many of their businesses, strategies, customer relationships and maybe even their brands.

In this part, I take an asset and resource view of all this, which I think is a much easier way to understand it.

Point 1: Digital competition is a lot about key resources, which are usually intangible assets.

You can look at competition with various frameworks.

  • Michael Porter famously described five economic forces, which tend to play out over the longer term in more stable industries.
  • Columbia Business School Professor Bruce Greenwald argued that one force, competition, is actually far more important than the other four.
  • Warren Buffett focuses mostly on competitive advantages and their durability.
  • Wharton’s George Day writes about dynamic competition and the constant move and counter-move of many businesses.

I focus mostly on digital competition (note: China is the global epicenter for this). This is a lot about how new digital tools and data are changing the competitive dynamics of traditional industries. For example, retailers traditionally compete on fixed costs and fixed assets (lots of stores, get bigger than your competitor). But ecommerce has a different dynamic. There is a lot more focus on the degree of participation of consumers, merchants and other users.

It can get confusing. And a useful approach is just to take a resource and asset view. Stop looking at the economic forces and competitive advantages, and just look at the assets used to compete. One company has 10 factories and the other only 5. One company has a famous brand that everyone knows and the other is unknown outside of one region. In digital competition, this usually means comparing intangible assets like technology, IP, captured customers, business linkages, and data.

If you take an asset view of competition in ecommerce and new retail, I think there are three big things that jump out as particularly important in a marketplace platform. Note: Alibaba is a marketplace and a pure digital competitor. JD is more of a hybrid of a marketplace (enable transactions but don’t take inventory or be the seller of record) and a direct retailer (buy and sell the goods yourself). For marketplace platforms (like Alibaba and VIP.com), the resources that matter are:

  • Captured online consumers. Their number, time spent, money spent and their participation on the site. And your degree of capture.
  • Captured online merchants and brands. Their number, their percent of business on the site, the integration of their operations into the site and their marketing activity on the site.
  • Content creators. Although this can be done as another type of retail (like Amazon’s digital media) or as an audience-building platform (like Youku)
  • Data from ecommerce, entertainment, social media and other sources.

These assets (both the users and the degree of activity) on the platform enable virtually everything else.

  • You can add new services and products.
  • You can add new types of revenue streams (transaction fees, marketing services, operational services, gifting, advertising, etc.).
  • And hopefully, you can use these assets to build competitive barriers. Network effects are the most desired. But there are also data network effects, MSP advantages, softer data advantages and linked businesses.

I view Alibaba as a particularly powerful version of this with three interconnected platforms: a marketplace platform, an audience-building content platform, and a payment platform.

These core assets cost a certain amount of money to acquire (plus time and difficulty). It’s a useful way to look at a company. But it’s also important to remember that these asset costs are different from the value they can then create. Similarly, the cost of a factory is different that the market value of the products it creates. And the cost of a college degree is different than how much you will make from it.

If you take an asset view, the sequence for marketplace platforms is usually:

  • Get an initial critical mass of users, merchants and data. There is usually a chicken-and-egg problem to get started (to get the consumers you need merchants, but to get merchants you need consumers).
  • Grow the number of users and their activity, mostly by data and digital tools. In marketplaces, personalization and curation are two of the big guns for this. Ancillary moves into new products and services or into new geographies (cross-border ecommerce) also really work.
  • Try to protect the platform with network effects, linked businesses, softer advantages and assets that are difficult to replicate.

Point 2: How these assets change over time is really important.

Alibaba is a virtual marketplace (so far). There are lots of supporting and complementary services (entertainment, payments, logistics / delivery, credit, etc.) but the core business remains connecting consumers with merchants and brands. And then making money from their transactions – and also from the marketing and other spending by merchants and brands on the platform. It’s a virtual shopping mall (Tmall) and a virtual trading bazaar (Taobao).

So what is the big difference between the intangible assets that create virtual marketplaces and the tangible assets that create real shopping malls? One of the most important differences is how these assets change of time.

If we were looking at a real shopping mall or bazaar, we would depreciate the PP&E over time. There would ongoing capex to maintain and maybe additional to grow. And in times of higher inflation, these assets can be a big problem as they really increase the cost structure. Plus there is also the real estate and land price aspects, which can be particularly important in downtown locations and in places like China.

But a marketplace made of intangible assets doesn’t necessarily decay over time. It certainly doesn’t straight-line depreciate. You may have to spend to keep it running (a type of maintenance capex, operating cost and customer retention cost) and for required upgrades – but the economic goodwill (not accounting goodwill, which is nonsense) should increase over time. And it doesn’t get hit by inflation (although labor costs can be a problem).

The same process can be true for other businesses that rely on intangible assets. Share of consumer mind (a Buffett term) is a big deal for Coca-Cola. Intellectual property and data / claims history can be important in technology and insurance. And so on.

But two differences I think about for intangible assets versus physical assets are:

  • Intangible assets can increase in real economic value over time – and often quite powerfully. This is good news.
  • Intangible assets are easier to replicate and often do not offer the types of competitive protection you get with physical assets. This is bad news (and why network effects and soft advantages can be critical).

Here’s how this can play out in marketplace platforms:

  • The more customers that come, the more valuable (and necessary) it is for merchants and brands to participate and compete with each other through marketing.
  • The more stores that arrive the more options consumers have and the richer their experience.
  • The more transactions and data from transactions, browsing and others sources (entertainment, etc) the more personalized and engaging the experience. This can enable more spending and engagement.
  • The more this ecosystem grows, the more difficult it is for a new competitor to replicate the entire ecosystem. The assets grow organically and become harder and harder to replicate.

Note: Parts of this can be described as a network effect. But it’s more about the degree of participation. Most MSPs do not have network effects and derive their value from their intangible assets.

Additionally, you get some competitive protection from an ability to cross-subsidize different parts of the platform (girls get free drinks at bars, men pay more). You can create complementary networks (Taobao helps Alipay and vice-versa). Yu can get linked businesses (Amazon’s cloud business subsidizes its logistics). And so on.

Question 1: How does “new retail” change a resource view of ecommerce?

This is the question I have been thinking about a lot. And a lot of this article is me thinking out loud.

But new retail is clearly a massive jump in the assets on the marketplace platform. And while all the talk is about physical retail, is Alibaba actually adding physical assets to their platform? I don’t think so. I think they are just leveraging in the intangibles of the tangible assets.

To me, new retail looks like it adds two big assets to the platform that Alibaba doesn’t have today. These are offline sales data and physical retailers, merchants and brands as users.

Take the “new retail” initiative in convenience stores. Alibaba is providing digital tools that transform mom-and-pop convenience stores in China. They plug in the tools and the stores gets three basic benefits.

  • Online customers can be driven into the stores from the local area (maybe). The merchant gets access to local online customers the same way an online merchant does. And they can market to them. Although in this case you are fighting for the customers in your neighborhood, not nationally. And you are fighting against other digitized local merchants, not every merchant in China.
  • They get digital tools that upgrade their payments, inventory, and supply chain. They get a bit of a store tech upgrade. Ideally, they get more efficient operations. Although adopting these tools also creates switching costs.
  • They get data that helps them choose their inventory for what people in that neighborhood actually want. This is hugely important and is part of Alibaba’s “uni-marketing” initiative.

And what does Alibaba get?

Well, the physical merchant just became as user in their marketplace platform. They add the transactions, the user and the data of the physical merchant without adding the physical assets. And they also probably got some new offline customers, but most everyone in China is already on Taobao.

So Alibaba is not going to own a lot of stores, such as Hema supermarkets or convenience stores. They are going to perfect the various business models and franchise out the system, the data and the technology tools. And for the hypermarkets, they will likely put that in a separate, associated and asset-heavy partner. And they will remain the data / tech partner for this, as they has done in logistics with Cainiao. The core marketplace, the engine of Alibaba, is going to remain tangible asset-lite and intangible asset-rich.

Now imagine they roll this out to 100,000 convenience stores in China? How many of those stores can be moved onto their ecosystem in this way? And then supermarkets? And then department stores? With a resource view, the size of the “new retail” opportunity is massive

Question 2: Who will own the customers in “new retail”?

This strikes me as a big question. Merchants are on Taobao and Tmall because they have to be. That’s where the customers are. They may also have their own branded website but they are also on Taobao and Tmall. And they can drive their customers to their stores and their own websites from here to a certain degree. But if they leave the Alibaba ecosystem customer retention is a problem. Famous companies like Zara and Apple have their own brands and customers. But most small merchants do not have this type of loyalty.

So this raises a question for new retail: if a physical merchant unplugs from the platform, do they take their customers with them? Or do those customers start getting directed to a different convenience store down the street? Who owns the customer in new retail?

WRITTEN BY: Jeffrey Towson

Recently in the news, Starbucks opened a new Roastery outlet on Nanjing Road in Shanghai last week begging the question, so what?

There’s nothing surprising about a new Starbucks in China, except this is now the world’s largest one at 30,000 sqm, twice the size of its counterparts in the US and will be the first-ever to incorporate in-store augmented reality (AR), thanks to China’s most influential internet company – Alibaba.

What can consumers do in this store powered by Alibaba’s technology and Mobile Taobao app?

  • Access a detailed map of the floors and menu with Alibaba’s location-based technology
  • Save favorite Starbucks products to their Mobile Taobao account
  • Scan key features around the Roastery to get information on coffee bars, brewing methods via animations
  • Earn a customized photo filter for sharing on social media
  • Ultimately, appeal to the digitally savvy Chinese audience

Sure, China is an attractive market to invest in but what is Starbucks planning with its“most ambitious project ever”?

An augmented reality app is used in the new Starbucks Roastery in Shanghai, China. Photographed on Friday, December 1, 2017. (Joshua Trujillo, Starbucks)

Slow Growth Around the World

Starbucks second quarterly earnings reported $5.29 billion, short $120 million of the expected $5.41 billion. While the coffee giant has found great success in its 46 years because of its consistent and convenient services and products, the company has felt the squeeze of rising competition from convenience stores and fast-food chains like McDonalds aggressively improving the quality and pricing of its beverages and menu.

And so, to capitalize on a blue ocean, the company decided to focus on a region where coffee culture is only emerging

Revenue from Asia Pacific makes up almost 15% of Starbucks’ annual revenue, a 5.5% increase from five years ago.

It’s obvious to us that the holding power of China for Starbucks is going to be much more significant than the holding power of the US,” — Starbucks’ founder and Chairman Howard Schultz.

As the Chinese economy grows, Starbucks’ success does as well in a country where disposable incomes increase and the younger generation is attracted to quality-driven and unique brands that speak to who they are.

“For coffee, there’s a certain kind of ‘in-the-know’ from consumers who seek out these good boutique shops,” said Jack Chuang, partner at OC&C Strategy Consultants who studied the Chinese coffee market.

Although still predominantly a tea-drinking nation, China is rapidly developing a taste for coffee, an activity previously thought was for the affluent or Westerners.

Jack Ma’s New Retail Vision Reinforced Through Coffee

What does Alibaba get out of it?

It was as recent as Single’s Day when Jack Ma announced the ‘New Retail’ concept that aims to blur the line between conventional brick-and-mortar retail and ecommerce with the help of technology and data.

In the coming years, we anticipate the birth of a re-imagined retail industry driven by the integration of online, offline, logistics and data across a single value chain,” — Jack Ma.

Alibaba’s HEMA Supermarkets already blur the line where consumers can shop for groceries online via the HEMA app and receive them within half an hour, or scan barcodes at the store, pay via the app, and set up delivery.

A shopper can easily scan barcodes in the store and pay for the products through the HEMA app before having them shipped home. Source: Alizila

Partnering with a highly influential brand like Starbucks and providing them with the right technology is Ma’s push for even faster digital adoption..

A survey has shown that 40% of consumers are willing to pay more for a product if they could experience it through AR, and 71% claim that they would shop at a retailer more often if they offered AR.

Seems like Starbucks and Alibaba will be brewing some heavy money in China.

Southeast Asia’s largest e-marketplace has released its first go at a loyalty program called LiveUp. Lazada’s new annual membership will cost $49.90 SGD (roughly $35.73 USD) after a free 60-day trial period and is currently discounted to $28.80 SGD ($20.62 USD). What goodies do subscribers get?

  • 10% rebate and free delivery in Singapore, rebate capped at $50 SGD per month
  • Free delivery for shoppers on Taobao’s shop-in-shop on Lazada
  • 5% rebate in RedMart credits and exclusive promotions
  • 2 months of Netflix during trial period and 4 months after LiveUp paid membership begins
  • $10 SGD off every 10th Uber ride, up to 12 times a year
  • Refunded delivery fee on orders over $35 SGD for Uber EATS up to 4 times a month
Lazada Prime

Lazada Singapore promoting LiveUp on its homepage

 

Why Lazada LiveUp? 

The company is well aware that acquiring customers through paid channels can be just as costly as a loyalty program – Forrester analyst estimates that Amazon loses approximately $1 billion annually on Prime-related shipping expenses.

But rather than attempting to change the mind of the masses, why not better satisfy current customers? It will also in turn lead to a higher repurchase rate.

One also needs to look to Lazada’s biggest upcoming threat, Amazon, whether the company is or isn’t entering the region. How has the giant been able to disrupt retail over and over?

For those who aren’t aware, the Amazon Prime program has been available since 2007 and evolved over the ten years. Subscription provides members with a long list of Amazon only benefits that include:

  • Free two-day shipping on eligible items to addresses in the contiguous US
  • Free same-day delivery in eligible zip codes. 
  • Prime Now: free two-hour delivery or scheduled delivery on over 10,000 items, from groceries to electronics and more. Plus, get free delivery from your favorite local stores.
  • Amazon Restaurants: one-hour delivery from popular restaurants for Prime members in eligible ZIP codes. [LiveUp Uber EATS]
  • Prime Video: unlimited streaming of movies and TV episodes for paid or free trial members in the US and Puerto Rico. [LiveUp Netflix]
  • Amazon Elements: access to Amazon’s own line of everyday essentials. [LiveUp Taobao] 
  • Amazon Dash for Prime
  • Prime Pantry: members can purchase and ship to addresses in the contiguous US low priced grocery, household, and pet care items for a flat delivery fee of $5.99 for each Prime Pantry box. [LiveUp RedMart]
  • Kindle First: early access for members in the US to download a new book for free every month from the Kindle First picks. 
  • Amazon Music Unlimited: discounted Amazon Music Unlimited monthly plans and exclusive annual plans.
  • Membership Sharing and a lot more.

Amazon Prime is one of the few things that currently enables the giant’s retail operations to make a profit.

“Amazon’s total operating profit for its retail operation came out to $2.66 billion. Revenue from our membership estimates covers 143%. Without Prime membership revenue, Amazon’s retail operations result in a $1.1 billion loss.” – The Motley Fool

By rough estimates, Amazon probably has at least 46 million Prime members paying $99 a year and more importantly, their customer loyalty. Prime members said they spent an average of $538 annually with Amazon, far more than the $320 by non-Prime members.

Subscription has become a very sharp tool in Amazon’s threat to all retailers and it makes sense for Southeast Asia’s largest online marketplace, Lazada, to finally equip itself with the same firepower and speed up its path to profitability.


Sign up for the eIQ Brief for ecommerce insights once a week here.

2016 was a buzz year for drone crafts. The technology gained instant coverage across different industries and media sites as more companies created drones or were rumored to have one in the works.

Various logistics industry specialists also came out to assess the role of delivery drones in the landscape of logistics and last mile and predicted that drones have the potential to disrupt and reduce costs associated with traditional supply chain.

Logistics companies and retailers such as Amazon and Walmart have invested in pilot projects, but no drone has yet been commercialized. Logistics players such as DHL and Flirtey have successfully completed a few drone deliveries but are currently still in trial period.

With so much chatter in the drone conversation, which companies in our industry have actually shown progress in drone deliveries? We take a look:

1. DHL

Having operated a drone research project since 2013, DHL reportedly made a trip around a mountainous area in Bavaria, Germany area three times faster than cars with its “parcelcopter” in May 2016.

We have achieved a level of technical and procedural maturity to eventually allow for field trials in urban areas as well,” said DHL manager Jürgen Gerdes.

The delivery giant also reported to have built an automated system that can deliver packages such as medical supplies between two remote Bavarian villages. End-customers were able to visit a DHL “skyports” location where it stores the drones during the trial period in November 2016, insert their package into an allocated box and input a code that activates the drone.

DHL is also the first to apply to be a part of the mobile controlled UAV traffic research project, which will be effective this year.

 

2. Amazon

drone deliveries

Amazon already has a plane, a credit card, an employee-less grocery store so naturally the giant would have a drone delivery system they coin Prime Air. The company expects the drones to transport packages safely to customers within 30 minutes.

According to recent reports, Amazon has filmed for permission to run tests on experimental wireless communications technology – possibly to bolster Prime Air. Tests will take place at Amazon’s headquarters in Seattle before moving to its customer service facility in Kennewick, Washington.

If the requested tests are indeed related to Prime Air, it highlights how serious Amazon is about implementing drone delivery on a large scale. The senior manager of Amazon’s drone delivery service is Neil Woodward, a retired astronaut, and is listed as the primary contact on documents submitted by Amazon to the Federal Communications Commission regarding base stations for the wireless comms technology.

3. UPS

UPS made headlines in October 2016 when the package delivery giant sent a drone to deliver an asthma inhaler to a children’s summer camp on an island just off Massachusetts in the US.

According to UPS, the company is focusing on using drones to fly in remote locations to deliver emergency supplies. A more widespread delivery service is years away into the future.

 

 

4. Diamler

Diamler, the manufacturer of Mercedes Benz has been taking very active strides in drone innovation this past year. From its drone-equipped delivery van concept in September 2016 to its most recent $17 million investment in London based Startship technologies, a delivery drone startup.

Diamler’s drones aim to change last mile deliveries by integrating an advanced routing solution, which will provide information on where to place a package or whether a signature is required. It will still have to maneuver between the drone regulations set by the FAA in the US though.

 

5. Walmart

In collaboration with the Federal Aviation Administration and NASA, Walmart was developing internally autonomous drone technology that allows a quad-copter drone to take 30 images per second from a top-mounted camera, as well as deliver parcels. This was back in June 2016.

The Walmart drone is most likely still in the development phase, but the company plans to integrate the drones into all of its distribution centers in the future.

 

6. Alibaba

The buzz surrounding Alibaba’s Taobao drone started to circulate last February. Taobao ran a real world test that lets 450 people in Beijing, Guangzhou and Shanghai order ginger tea and receive it within the hour. The test period only lasted for 2 days, but it was one of the first practical instances of drone delivery in urban areas.

Since then, the Taobao drone has been PR shy.

 

7. 7-Eleven/Flirtey

7-Eleven actually got a head start in the drone race, beating everyone by being the first to successfully complete a regular drone delivery to consumers in the US in December 2016. Approximately over 70 orders were placed in Reno, Nevada and received doorstep drone treatment.

According to Flirtey, the average delivery time was 10 minutes. Customers mainly ordered snacks and beverages, including over the counter medicine.

Slurpees and sandwiches could be widely delivered within the US via drones in the near future.

 

What’s next?

Which logistics company or retailer do you think should pilot drones next? Is Southeast Asia too far away from launching commercial drones or would the bustling streets of Bangkok and Jakarta be prime locations for drones in the future? Let us know in the comments.

Here are today’s top ecommerce news.

1. Taobao is officially back on the USTR “notorious markets” list

The US Trade Representative (USTR) has put Alibaba’s C2C platform, Taobao, back onits “notorious markets” list. Being included on the notorious markets list is a black mark, suggesting that a company is guilty of allowing rampant piracy and IP theft, but it doesn’t come with any sort of sanction and it isn’t likely to affect Taobao’s day-to-day business.

Seemingly, USTR was getting pressure from both sides while making this decision. After submitting a public draft of its report for comments this summer, numerous trade groups appealed to the USTR to put Taobao back on the list.

Read the rest of the story here.

 

2. Amazon has injected $296 million into its Indian unit

A report in The Economic Times says Amazon is estimated to have spent more than Rs1000 crore last month to woo customers with special offers and discounts for the festive season, and is losing about Rs600 crore every month.

Amazon entered India three years ago, introducing some of its global programs this year including its Prime service, which offers quicker deliveries and early-access deals. All this is an attempt to knock Flipkart out of its reigning position.

Read the rest of the story here.

 

3. Singapore-based fintech investor Senjō Group acquires UK payments company Kalixa

The acquisition will allow Senjō Group to extend its reach into European markets. For Kalixa, the deal enables it to leverage on Senjō Group to broaden its network in Asia, as well as other regions within the global payments company’s portfolio.

The transaction is expected to be completed by Q1 2017.

Read the rest of the story here.