admin
February 21, 2016
Shinmin
Bali, Financial Express
![]()
![]()
![]()


TinyOwl last year was in the news for a poorly-handled downsizing
operation in Pune, with a dramatic hostage situation involving
its co-founder Gaurav Choudhary. PepperTap also recently shut
down operations in six cities.
Ironically, giants like Amazon have not only aggressively entered
the hyperlocal space, they are building on it. Amazon is currently
offering the service in Bengaluru, Amazon Now, after running a
pilot project, Kirana Now, in 2015.
The investor sentiment in India is also on a decline, as was
reported earlier this year. Investments by venture capitalists
have dropped from $2.12 billion (October-December 2014) to $1.15
billion (October-December 2015), according to a report by CB Insights
and KPMG International. This leaves an even shorter window of
opportunity for players to retain investor interest.
Albinder Dhindsa, co-founder, Grofers, states that differing
levels of technology literacy among the majority of merchants
and consumer adaptation to the online platform are concern areas
for the company. In 2016, the company is looking to bring over
one lakh merchants aboard and ensure that turnaround time stays
under an hour. Grofers delivers more than 35,000 orders per day
on average. In Q4 2015, the firm acquired teams of SpoonJoy and
Townrush to bring dynamic learning to the table.
For Swiggy’s co-founder Nandan Reddy, the focus is currently
to grow the market, while catering to a wide demographic of consumers.
He admits that in the early stages, the brand had trouble educating
even its partners. Furthermore, operating a delivery fleet in
an on-demand service offering sub-40 minute deliveries is a challenging
task, given that there are at least 15 points of failure in an
average order. Swiggy currently owns a delivery fleet of 3,800
delivery executives. The brand’s repeat consumers contribute
to over 80% of orders.
Debadutta Upadhyaya, co-founder, Timesaverz, says some of the
major challenges in a hyperlocal market are optimum resource utilisation
and matching locations, price points, and other specific requirements
to customer needs. Timesaverz currently has a service range spread
across 40 categories, aided by a network of over 2,500 service
partners across five metros. Its revenue model is commission based,
where 80% of earnings from consumers are shared with service partners.
Vinod Murali, MD, Innoven Capital, points out that as the hyperlocal
industry is in its nascent stages, it needs a fair amount of time
to grow. “One aspect to keep in mind is that a large sized
equity cheque does not imply that a company has achieved operational
maturity or robust business metrics, especially in this segment,”
he notes.
Given the recent consolidation in this category, the survivors
have the opportunity and time to focus on improving unit economics
and demonstrate that their businesses are viable and valuable.
Devangshu Dutta, CEO, Third Eyesight, is of the opinion that
hyperlocals make the mistake of borrowing business models and
terminologies from Silicon Valley, without adequately understanding
the real context of the Indian market. “Is there an existing
or even potential demand for the service claimed to be provided?
Or are you just going to introduce an intermediary and an additional
link in the chain, with additional costs and unnecessary administration
involved?” he asks.
(Published in Financial Express)
Devangshu Dutta
January 21, 2016


Aggregator models and hyperlocal delivery, in theory, have some significant advantages over existing business models.
Unlike an inventory-based model, aggregation is asset-light, allowing rapid building of critical mass. A start-up can tap into existing infrastructure, as a bridge between existing retailers and the consumer. By tapping into fleeting consumption opportunities, the aggregator can actually drive new demand to the retailer in the short term.
A hyperlocal delivery business can concentrate on understanding the nuances of a customer group in a small geographic area and spend its management and financial resources to develop a viable presence more intensively.
However, both business models are typically constrained for margins, especially in categories such as food and grocery. As volume builds up, it’s feasible for the aggregator to transition at least part if not the entire business to an inventory-based model for improved fulfilment and better margins. By doing so the aggregator would, therefore, transition itself to being the retailer.
Customer acquisition has become very expensive over the last couple of years, with marketplaces and online retailers having driven up advertising costs – on top of that, customer stickiness is very low, which means that the platform has to spend similar amounts of money to re-acquire a large chunk of customers for each transaction.
The aggregator model also needs intensive recruitment of supply-side relationships. A key metric for an aggregator’s success is the number of local merchants it can mobilise quickly. After the initial intensive recruitment the merchants need to be equipped to use the platform optimally and also need to be able to handle the demand generated.
Most importantly, the acquisitions on both sides – merchants and customers – need to move in step as they are mutually-reinforcing. If done well, this can provide a higher stickiness with the consumer, which is a significant success outcome.
For all the attention paid to the entry and expansion of multinational retailers and nationwide ecommerce growth, retail remains predominantly a local activity. The differences among customers based on where they live or are located currently and the immediacy of their needs continue to drive diversity of shopping habits and the unpredictability of demand. Services and information based products may be delivered remotely, but with physical products local retailers do still have a better chance of servicing the consumer.
What has been missing on the part of local vendors is the ability to use web technologies to provide access to their customers at a time and in a way that is convenient for the customers. Also, importantly, their visibility and the ability to attract customer footfall has been negatively affected by ecommerce in the last 2 years. With penetration of mobile internet across a variety of income segments, conditions are today far more conducive for highly localised and aggregation-oriented services. So a hyperlocal platform that focusses on creating better visibility for small businesses, and connecting them with customers who have a need for their products and services, is an opportunity that is begging to be addressed.
It is likely that each locality will end up having two strong players: a market leader and a follower. For a hyperlocal to fit into either role, it is critical to rapidly create viability in each location it targets, and – in order to build overall scale and continued attractiveness for investors – quickly move on to replicate the model in another location, and then another. They can become potential acquisition targets for larger ecommerce companies, which could acquire to not only take out potential competition but also to imbibe the learnings and capabilities needed to deal with demand microcosms.
High stake bets are being placed on this table – and some being lost with business closures – but the game is far from being played out yet.
Devangshu Dutta
January 15, 2016


Retailers seem to be fighting a losing battle against the growth of ecommerce, and it is only the nature of the shopping activity, especially for fashion – interactive, social, and immersive as it is – that has kept many retailers relevant and in business.
However, the defensive stance is changing, and now they’re using technology to get the customers back into the store. Forward-thinking retailers are reimagining trial rooms, stores, business processes and entire business models. It’s not a physical versus virtual approach but an approach that integrates both sides. The idea is to create a more immersive experience than pure digital retail can be, using some of the same tools as ecommerce.
It is important to remember that the whole retail environment is a “suggestive” environment. Due to cost and other operational factors most retailers are ill-equipped to provide appropriate levels of excitement, suggestion and support during the browsing and buying process.
For many, the simplest move could be screens serving up their catalogue to customers within the store. For instance, US department store chain Kohl’s has initiated connected fitting rooms that identify products the customer is carrying, and bring up not only those items onscreen, but additional colours and sizes that are available. If the customer wants an alternative, a message goes to a sales associate who can fetch the requested option. Macy’s and Bloomingdales are using tablets in the trial rooms, while Nordstrom, Neiman Marcus and Rebecca Minkoff are attempting to boost their fashion sales using magic mirrors to provide similar enablement. These devices and the processes empower and involve the customer far more, while leaving store staff free for other activities.
A step up, Puma is using “virtual trials” for its apparel products by having a customer take images of herself in specific positions, and then mapping styles on their own images to visualise how they might look. While this needs more work and investment, this is still only a more developed product browser technique from the customer’s point-of-view.
The next level, augmented reality trials and virtual fit, are significantly more sophisticated at creating simulations of a selected garment image draping and falling on the customer’s body even as he or she moves normally. Imaging and texturing of the simulated garments is technically challenging and expensive, repeated for each new style and option. The imaging also needs to mimic the “wearer’s” movements. Nevertheless, retailers such as Polo Ralph Lauren are finding it worth their while to investigate these new technologies, as these reintroduce the much needed “theatre” that are integral to a successful retailer.
For the customer virtualisation expands the number of items “taken” into the trial room, and creates more convenient product discovery. More products can be seen in the same shopping time, and sharing of images and videos with friends and family, engages them in the shopping process as well.
For retailers, the benefits multiply. Inventory can be optimised, and there is reduced handling and shrinkage. Even without sales associates, it is feasible to prompt for alternatives and related products, improving conversion and transaction values, reducing space and costs of physical trial rooms, and increasing the number of customers serviced especially at peak traffic times.
A phenomenal advantage is the data captured that is relevant while the customer is in the store, but which can be linked to future promotions. Valuable intelligence, such as what is being tried and for how long, can help the retailer to quickly gauge demand patterns, and adjust pricing and promotions. Normally retailers only capture sales transactions (post-fact), and miss out the rich information on in-store behaviour that etailers do collect and analyse.
However, massive hurdles to virtualisation remain, including data input accuracy, product accuracy, and the technical capabilities of the tech solution adopted. A bigger concern is whether technology is intuitive and seamless, or whether it gets in the way of the shopping experience. Further, consumers do have privacy concerns about the images and other data collected.
Its important to remind ourselves that, on its own, technology is just a novelty – huge transformation of business processes, organisational capabilities and behaviours must happen as well.
That is perhaps the biggest mountain to climb.
admin
September 8, 2015
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()


As per a PwC analyst, investors have pumped more than $150 million
into companies like Grofers, TinyOwl, Swiggy, LocalOye, Spoonjoy,
Zimmber and HolaChef, among others. Judging by the patronage showered
upon them by customers and investors alike, it would appear that
hyperlocal start-ups are all set to create the next big boom in
the Indian retail sector. But is it really all that rosy? Probably
not, as can be amply witnessed by acquisitions taking place in
the nascent yet already overcrowded market.
Between November 2014 and February 2015, the Rocket Internet-backed
Foodpanda acquired rivals TastyKhana and JustEat.in, and is rumoured
to be in acquisition mode with TinyOwl. Restaurant search app
Zomato, which recently got into the food ordering space, is also
reportedly looking to acquire minority stakes in food-ordering
firms.
While investors are attracted to hyperlocal start-ups, controlling
logistics well is key to sustained growth for these businesses
— all of these will definitely go through a constraint in
the supply of delivery boys, for example. In India, organising
fragmented labour is a challenge and, hence, a services-based
hyperlocal needs to figure out the mechanics of human capital
even more than a traditional, product-based e-commerce firm.
For services, another challenge is customer stickiness. If a
user uses an app to obtain the services of a plumber, for example,
he may not go through the app to contact the plumber next time
if his services are found satisfactory. Discounting can induce
trials, but just like in any other business, prove fatal in the
long run. Like what led to the end of HomeJoy in the US —
excessive discounts to dissuade direct contact between servicemen
and customers.
Even for product-based start-ups, maintaining data quality is
a big hurdle as stock and prices may not be updated by retailers
in real time, making it difficult to track offline sales.
Since the game is hyperlocal, you need to be physically present
in the city to bring retailers aboard. For that, you need a city
team. Other challenges include retailer verification and assessment,
given that hyperlocals deal with small city retailers.
Stickiness is needed on both sides, and each locality will certainly evolve into having a market leader and a follower, with other players falling far behind. “So the critical success factor for a hyperlocal is being able to rapidly create a viable model in each location it targets, and then—to build overall scale and continued attractiveness for investors—quickly move on to replicate the model in another location, and then another,” says retail consultant Devangshu Dutta of Third Eyesight. As they do that, they will become potential acquisition targets for larger ecommerce companies, which could use acquisition to not only take out potential competition but also to imbibe the learning and capabilities needed to deal with microcosms of consumer demand.
(Published in Financial Express.)
admin
September 8, 2015
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()


To put the whole picture in context, the Indian retail industry
is worth $500-600 billion. Of this, grocery items account for
about 67% of the revenue. However, in case of fast moving consume
goods (FMCG) and grocery, modern retail formats account for less
than 10% of the total sale. E-commerce or hyperlocals are obviously
a tiny part of the pie just yet. Most companies, therefore, are
still at a stage where they have to prove their business models
and change consumer behaviour.
While on-demand grocery delivery—the model that players
such as Grofers ride on—has immense potential in this space,
other high potential categories include delivery of services (such
as supplying peons/delivery boys, specialised laundry services,
plumbers or electricians), price comparisons, food ordering apps,
etc.
Hyperlocal startups in India
It is a no-brainer that an aggregation model, since it is asset-light,
is less capital-intensive than the inventory-led one. Moreover,
it is easier to scale up such a model. The new generation of hyperlocal
start-ups is coupling aggregation with logistics/delivery, thus
controlling even the last mile.
Take Zopper, a product-based hyperlocal which started off as
a price comparison website for electronics but now is a platform
for purchasing products from offline stores. It counts on faster
delivery through tie-ups with local shops near a buyer. “City
by city, we need to bring more merchants on board, and all they
have to do is download an app and their product can be listed
on Zopper,” says Neeraj Jain, CEO, Zopper. The company’s
margins vary from 2-8%.
Home services start-up Taskbob, founded by Aseem Khare, charges
a 20% commission from its servicemen. Product price comparison
website MySmartPrice works on commission too, while providing
a free six-month on-board period to offline sellers, where they
can use the platform for gaining traction. The revenue model of
BookMeIn, another home services company, includes a monthly subscription
fee for a SaaS-backed system given to service providers to manage
their business. Further, it gets revenues on leads/bookings done
by customers on the website, along with revenues through ads of
service providers. So what’s working in their favour?
A fertile environment
Indian retail is still dominated by brick-and-mortar stores, which,
oddly, is an opportunity in disguise for hyperlocal players. Unlike
non-hyperlocal e-commerce, these start-ups are not really competing
with offline retailers, but are partnering them instead.
Hyperlocal business models spell instant, on-demand delivery as
they cater to needs of a more immediate nature. The gratification
is far more accelerated – the entire transaction can be completed
in an hour sometimes. Customers also tend to trust hyperlocals
more than non-hyperlocal e-commerce websites, as the stores they
buy from through online platforms have a physical presence, making
it possible to attend to any grievances quickly. Further, the
start-up can tap into existing infrastructure, acting as a bridge
between existing retailers and the consumer.
“Due to the convenience factor, by being able to tap
into consumption opportunities that might have otherwise been
missed, the aggregator can actually drive new demand to the retailer
in the short term,” says retail consultant Devangshu Dutta,
chief executive, Third Eyesight.
Within hyperlocals, services have higher margins of around 20%
as opposed to product based models which earn 2-10% margins or
even non-hyperlocal e-commerce companies, which operate on 3-7%
margins, depending on the category.
This is because there is virtually no warehousing, inventory management or logistics involved in a services hyperlocal. Within services, food-ordering apps have an added advantage of the frequency of purchase as opposed to, say, e-commerce products. “The category is a high-repeat one as opposed to home repair for example,” says Saurabh Kochhar, co-founder and CEO, India, and chief business officer, global, Foodpanda.


A word of caution
While it ensures higher margins, replication of a services model
is much more difficult. Training of people in services is very
difficult as each individual has to be available wherever the
customer is located. “Second, when a product delivery happens,
I need local people to deliver it but if a person is coming to
give a service, he represents your brand and should know how to
handle a customer,” says Alagu Balaraman, partner and MD,
Indian operations, CGN Global India, a supply chain management
consulting firm.
Third, as the services industry is rather fragmented, it is difficult
to form partnerships with associations or groups of such service
providers, as specialists are spread out across the country. Fourth,
creating a need for services might be difficult as people may
already have their own local set-up in place. “But that mindset
is changing, with a large group of urban people who don’t
have the time or patience and need professional services,”
he says.
The biggest learning will be the capability to scale. A hyperlocal that focuses on a single ‘locality’ will find it difficult to get the scale needed to create an economically viable model. Being able to identify a widespread but local need, and having a model that adapts to each new market will be crucial.
(Published in Financial Express.)