‘Organic’ investment should be the saviour of (some) retail.

‘Organic’ investment should be the saviour of (some) retail.

Feb 16, 2018 | Customers, Marketing, retail

I went into a retail store last week with a problem, not really expecting to find anyone or anything that remotely met the immediate need I faced.

My web search had revealed many solutions, none of which gave me much confidence for one reason or another, but it had sparked a few ideas.

Lo and behold, the store I went to, (after a bit of web research) an independent store that clearly understood the niche it was servicing, had made a significant ‘organic’ investment.

They had several people who understood my problem, and were able to offer several sensible alternative solutions, one of which was perfect.

When faced with the same or similar challenge again, guess where I am going!

It may not be for a while, but inevitably it will happen again. Meanwhile, guess which store I am touting to my friends and colleagues.

Ironically, it seems that the most successful retailer on the planet, when measured by the standard retail sales/sq foot, and margin/square foot metric is one of the tech disrupters: Apple. They have redefined bricks and mortar retail by adding ‘organic’ sales staff to the best long term branding job ever seen, except perhaps for a couple of the major religions. At the end of 2017. Apple had 499 stores worldwide, and not content to leave well enough alone, are continuously investing and experimenting with formats, layout, branding, and the important ‘organic’ part of this hugely successful bricks and mortar puzzle.

On Wednesday (Feb 14, how appropriate) the Myer CEO was dumped by the board for failing to turn the ship around. The last time I was in a Myer store, admittedly some time ago, as I have no wish to repeat the experience,  there was no staff anywhere to be seen. My intention had been to buy a suit that had been advertised as part of a sale. Good price, good brand, I was in the store to buy, but no sale for Myer, although I did buy a similar suit elsewhere. Firing the CEO will have little impact on my future purchase intentions, without the long term investment in one of the the foundations of successful retail, good people at the customer coal-face, and a management culture that recognises and nurtures those people.

Digital is great, the convenience, price, and range are seductive, but there is no substitute for a person who has deep domain knowledge, has seen the problem before, and who is happy to help, and clearly gets a kick out of doing so. After all that, price does not matter so much, it just needs to be in the ball-park.

Just ask Apple.

Photo credit: Harry Pappas via Flikr

The downside of FMCG retail scale.

The downside of FMCG retail scale.

Feb 14, 2018 | Innovation, retail, Strategy

Woolies and Coles have around 75% of FMCG sales in this country, depending on whose numbers you believe, and which categories are included.

They have huge scale, from the farm gate through the supply chain to the consumers wallets. As a result, their cost of capital is low, as lenders, both cash and equity see the risks as being low. When you add in their ‘trading terms’ as a component of  their cost of capital, as it should be, the numbers would look even better. Pay your suppliers in 90 days, having used your scale to reduce the price to subsistence levels or lower, minus  the deductions for whatever you can dream up, during which time,  the stock has turned over several times.

Bargain!

By contrast, the small suppliers, those few that are left,  are seen as poor risks, which in fact they are being an endangered species. Their costs of capital are high, as are their operating and working capital costs, which leaves little to nothing to be invested in the future of their businesses.

That is why they have mostly disappeared. Their management has been unable to balance the competing demands of low price and increasing operating costs, such that even large seemingly successful businesses became smaller unsuccessful ones to be sold off to whoever had the cash. Consider Goodman Fielder, SPC, Dairy Farmers, National  Foods, CSR, …… need I go on?

The long term problem that this trend delivers is that innovation, the creation of new value for customers, and the lifeblood of retailers comes from the edges, from outside the  status quo. It is usually those smaller, entrepreneurial businesses that get in there and have a go, take a risk, and survive on their vision, wits and determination, that deliver the category makers.

Pity they are almost all gone, and what we have left is a number of ‘traditional’ retailers seeking to optimise their existing operations, while having nothing to fight the well-funded disruptors coming to eat their lunch.

Woolworths emasculating and closing Thomas Dux is the classic case of corporate strategic blindness. Now they have backtracked with the very well thought out new Marrickville Metro store, which is not Woolworths, but the ghost of Thomas Dux back to haunt them. Meanwhile, Amazon is really innovating, taking their pilot Amazon Go store public a couple of weeks ago, in a move that goes well towards defining the store of the future.

The downside of scale is the conservatism and lack of real innovative and strategic vision that comes with a business intent on optimising the current model. If that worked, Olivetti would  still be a significant player in the document creation business, Kodak would still be creating memories,  and Microsoft would still be a near monopoly.

Header credit: apologies to Monty

A marketers explanation of Net Present Value (NPV)

A marketers explanation of Net Present Value (NPV)

Feb 12, 2018 | Governance, Management

‘What the Hell is NPV?‘ the marketer cried

Accountants seem to love to baffle with jargon, but that is not, usually, what they set out to do.

Rather , they use terms as a shorthand to describe what to them makes absolute sense, but to the rest of us, mere marketing mortals, seems like gobbledygook.

One of the ones that commonly causes headaches is ‘Net Present Value’  or NPV.

Guaranteed to put most marketers to sleep.

However, you should not sleep, way better to understand the idea in simple  terms so you have an understanding of the conversation, and can contribute in a meaningful way.

NPV  is simply one of the common methods of calculating the relative value of a number of investment choices. It recognises that money you have today is worth more than money you may have tomorrow because it can be invested,   used now, while the ‘future money’ is subject to inflation and risk.

Often the term ‘time value of money’ will be used.

It is one of a suite of calculations that can be used when sorting out which projects to pursue from a range of possibilities. It provides an objective measure that enables you to make better choices, that management challenge in a world of subjectivity, conjecture and bullshit.

Marketers should understand the principal, if not necessarily the formula, which is readily available in just about every spreadsheet application since  Visicalc. Remember that? I do, it became a marketers best friend, years before excel emerged.

The formula is relatively simple, it just looks a bit complex.

The discount rate is the rate of inflation used, plus the amount you choose to add to allow for risk.

Most businesses use a consistent discount rate that reflects their return on investment hurdle rates. For example, if the current inflation rate is 1%, and the business requires an 8% ROI, the discount rate will be 9%

The great benefit of NPV to marketers is that it uses the cash flows derived from a proposal to sort out the priority, not just the quantum of the initial investment, so  it reflects the forecast cash success over time.

For example, you want to invest $3 million in gear to launch a new product, that is forecast to deliver a net profit of $1.3 million/year for 3 years, with a discount rate of 9%.

There are a number of sequential steps to take.

  • Calculate the present value of each years net profit by dividing the net profit by (1+discount rate). In year 1, that is 1,300,000/(1+.09) or 1,192,661. The ‘1’ in the formula being the current inflation rate
  • Repeat the exercise for each subsequent year, in year 2, it would be 1,192661/(1+.09) or 1,094,184.
  • In year 3 1094,184/(1+.09) 1,033,838
  • Add the present values calculated, 1,192,661 + 1,094,184 + 1,003,838 = 3,290,683 to give you the total forecast present value of your money in three years, then subtract the initial investment to give you the net present value of the investment.  $3290683 – 3,000,000 = $290,683.

The larger the positive number the better, a negative number would indicate that the project will drain cash from the business, a positive one adding cash.

To make the choice between investment options, repeat the exercise for  each, and pick the one with the highest positive value.

Clearly, the calculation is based on a series of assumptions and forecasts, so there is a lot of room for error, but when used in a consistent manner it is a good tool to assist making difficult choices, and offers the flexibility to do some informed scenario and ‘what if’ planning.

 

 

 

 

The easy way of course is just to go to excel, and look for NPV in the formulas tab, which will give you the numbers, but not the understanding of what they mean.

Photo Credit: Bentley Smith via Flikr

Three metrics by which to measure the value of marketing content.

Three metrics by which to measure the value of marketing content.

Feb 9, 2018 | Communication, Marketing

All marketing content I have ever seen is driven by one, or a combination of three things:

  • Vanity
  • They have something to sell
  • They have something to say.

There is always some overlap, but when you dig deeper, the motivation is always one of the three, and by a vast majority, one of the first two. To be clear, ‘Content’ is everything you post, from a thoughtful and original marketing blog post you wrote, to a research paper published elsewhere, to a cat photo.

However, the most successful content is when you have something to say, an idea you want to articulate and spread, a perspective that throws light on a question.

It becomes pretty easy with some level of objectivity, to put some numbers against these simple measures, even vary the sizes of the ‘bubbles’ to reflect the relative size visually.

When the purpose of a piece of content is to inform, educate, enlighten, and that purpose is met, financial outcomes may follow, but they should not be the objective, they are the outcome of great content.

What is your purpose for your content?

 

 

 

How does the Amazon innovation formula keep replicating?

How does the Amazon innovation formula keep replicating?

Feb 7, 2018 | Change, Governance, Innovation, Strategy

Amazon is an astonishing company for a whole lot of reasons, but there is one that is not front and centre in most conversations I have seen and in which I have been involved. This is the means by which Amazon just keeps on innovating, genuine, disruptive innovations, time after time, at astonishingly small intervals.

Note: This link is to an expanded version of this infographic from Visualcapitalist.com

 

Amazon must have the internal processes that enable it to punch out new businesses, and business models that way a factory stamping machine pumps out widgets.

The biggest impediment to efficiency on a widget machine is the changeover times between widget sizes and internal specifications.

Quick changeover is a hallmark capability sought by manufacturing companies employing Lean thinking, and is a challenging proposition, even in a small, tightly run factory. So how does Amazon achieve it at scale in businesses as complex as it routinely disrupts.

Amazon started by flogging books, or as CEO Jeff Bezos  (apparently) liked to say in the early days, ‘we do not sell books, we make books easy to buy’

The hallmark of a successful lean implementation in a factory is that there are processes that take a prospective order through the whole ‘sales funnel’ to production, delivery, and ongoing relationship building. Lean practitioners call it the ‘Value Stream,’ the set of activities required to deliver value to the customer. These are all done the same way, every time.

The paradox is that this process stability is the foundation of innovation, you need a stable base in order to trial ideas at speed, then scale the ones that work. This is an idea sometimes hard to communicate but as fundamental as it gets to successful innovation and continuous improvement.

Amazon appears to have achieved this at scale, in a service business, typically harder than a manufacturing business to get traction.

How?

Amazon is organised just like a whole collection of independent business units, all cross fertilising, and cross pollinating each other, using (I suspect) what Ray Dalio would term ‘Radical Transparency‘.

The secret seems twofold:

  • The internal technology that Amazon uses across all its activities, is modular and scaleable.  It is in effect the machine enabling the manufacturing of Amazon widgets. This enables new businesses to be added the way you would add another coloured widget to the sales inventory of a manufacturing business. I suspect the scalability will be the source of the next round of disruptions coming to the fast moving goods retailers.
  • Each part of the business multiplies the customer impact of the ones next door, a ‘flywheel’ effect. Digital technology enables the network or ‘Flywheel’ effect to build momentum. The more eyeballs you have on one side of the network equation, the greater the value to the other side. This effect builds scale very efficiently once you have reached a tipping point, reflecting Metcalf’s law which states that the value of a network increases with the number of nodes in the network.  Amazon has created their own version of Metcalfe’s law amongst their own offerings, one product or service leading to the one next door.

Bezos has achieved something that I think will be studied for decades, and it is clear he is not stopping any time soon. The only thing that appears likely to slow the momentum is regulatory intervention. Amazon has 44% of  on line retail sales in the US, 35% of global cloud services, a market growing at 40% a year,  where AWS is bigger than the next 5 biggest combined. The list goes on. The point is, Amazon is chewing up competition everywhere, yet pays very little tax, $1.4 billion since 2008, while Wal-Mart has paid $64 billion over the same period, so in effect, Wal-mart is subsidising its greatest threat to eat its lunch. Outcomes and numbers like that will have to prod regulators into some sort of action, before Amazon (and to be fair, Facebook and Google are very similar, even more dominating in their markets)  is in a position of power so dominant that regulators cannot stop them.

Amazon, a product of the 21st century is simply outrunning the capacity of the institutions and public mind set of the 20th century by reshaping our world around us, and with our consent by unthinking compliance. They are being joined in this exercise by Google, Facebook,  Alibaba Tencent, and a few other aspirants like Netfliks, to dominate the way we think, behave and work.

Header photo Jeff Bezos circa 1998

 

Update June 2018.

Amazon bought on line pharmacist ‘Pillpack’  last week for almost a billion dollars, saw its own share price jump double what they paid at the same time industry incumbents collectively lost 10% market valuation. Jeff Bezos has signalled his interest in pharmacy in various ways for years, so this should not come as a surprise, but it seems to have done so, as the threat of Amazon had clearly not been priced into the market valuations of the incumbents.

The Pharmacy guild in Australia, one of the most powerful lobby groups in the country, should be asking themselves if they are next for the chopper.

Update August 2022.Amazon last month paid $A5.6 billion for subscription health service One-Health, which gives them a network of doctors surgeries around the US. If ever there was a huge industry mired in its own importance, removed from the needs of those it is supposed to service, and ripe for disruption, it is the US health care industry. It will be a tough nut to crack, others have tried and failed, but Amazon has the street-cred to make it happen. The ‘flywheel’ at work again.