admin
October 7, 2024
Writankar Mukherjee, Economic Times
7 October 2024
Reliance Retail has initiated efforts to enter the thriving quick commerce market in a move that is set to escalate competition for Zomato-owned Blinkit, Swiggy Instamart and BigBasket, among others. The country’s largest retailer has started offering quick commerce services in select areas in Navi Mumbai and Bengaluru through its ecommerce platform JioMart since last weekend.
It will initially sell grocery items from its retail stores totalling about 3,000 nationwide, eventually adding value fashion and small electronic products such as smartphones, laptops and speakers, a senior executive said. All orders will be fulfilled from its own network of stores including Reliance Digital and Trends.
The retail arm of Reliance Industries plans to rapidly scale up its quick commerce venture pan-India by this month-end with the aim to deliver most orders in 10-15 minutes and the rest within 30 minutes, the executive said. The company will use its acquired logistics service Grab for the fulfilment.
Reliance, however, doesn’t have any plan to set up dark stores or neighbourhood warehouses, unlike other quick commerce operators, the executive said. Analysts said this may become a challenge in delivering orders within 30 minutes in large cities where traffic is high during peak hours.
To entice customers, Reliance won’t charge any delivery fee, platform fee or surge fee irrespective of the order value, and keep a major focus on untapped smaller cities and towns where quick commerce operators like Blinkit are yet to enter, the executive said. Other platforms have a delivery fee and platform fee.
Reliance plans to offer a wider choice of products of 10,000-12,000 stock keeping units by linking its entire store inventory to the quick commerce business, which too is much more than rivals.
Eventually, the company aims to cover 1,150 cities spanning 5,000 pin codes where it runs grocery stores. The executive said the company would target a bigger share of business from towns and smaller cities hitherto untapped by quick commerce firms.
“Reliance has reworked the way orders are delivered for JioMart. Earlier, orders had a scheduled delivery taking 1-2 days by small trucks who would take multiple orders and deliver them one by one. Now, all grocery orders will be quick commerce where one delivery bike or cycle will deliver one order. Each grocery store will cover a 3 KM radius,” the executive said.
Earlier this year, the company tried to reduce JioMart delivery timings to a few hours or at least the same day under its hyperlocal initiative. It has fine-tuned the process further to 10-30 minute delivery. “This has become a top-of-the-kind requirement in the market right now,” the executive said.
A spokesperson for Reliance Retail didn’t respond to ET’s queries.
Devangshu Dutta, chief executive at consulting firm Third Eyesight, said Reliance can ultimately use a blended approach of quick commerce deliveries in areas near its stores and scheduled deliveries a bit far away.
“Since they are in a market share acquisition mode in quick commerce, charging no transaction fees and offering higher discounts on products is a given. There is significant scope for deep-pocketed players like Reliance to strengthen presence in quick commerce. They have aggressively backed other experiments in the retail business once they worked, and may do it again,” said Dutta.
For fast-moving consumer goods companies, quick commerce is the fastest growing channel, accounting for 30-35% of total online sales.
(Published in Economic Times)
admin
September 16, 2024
Priyamvada C., Mint
16 September 2024
When the late George Fernandes, the industries minister in the short-lived Janata Party government of 1977, issued a diktat to multinational corporations Coca-Cola, IBM and AstraZeneca to dilute their stake in their wholly owned subsidiaries to 40% in favour of Indian shareholders, Coca-Cola and IBM chose to exit India. Later, during P V Narasimha Rao’s proliberalisation government in 1993, Coca-Cola returned. It bought out Ramesh Chauhan’s Delhi Bottling Company and Coolaid, the bottling companies of five carbonated drinks, in 1998.
With Coca-Cola India now said to be evaluating options to list its wholly owned bottling subsidiary – Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages (HCCB), Mint explains the rationale behind companies considering such moves.
What caused the change in strategy?
Experts said there is a trend of consumer giants spinning off their units to optimise their balance sheets, go asset-light and focus on their core brands and business models. Coca-Cola India’s ambitions to list HCCB come almost a decade after rival PepsiCo’s bottler, Varun Beverages, listed on the local stock exchanges, yielding significant value for the Jaipuria family.
Unlike PepsiCo, Coca-Cola owns its bottling franchise, just as other MNCs including consumer goods major Whirlpool, ball-bearing specialist Timken, and tobacco giant BAT, who are keen to take advantage of the valuations that Indian investors give to well-run MNCs. Varun Beverages commands a market valuation of ₹2.09 trillion. Hindustan Unilever and Colgate-Palmolive (India) are examples of multinational companies that have listed in India.
Coca-Cola’s move is seen as a strategic attempt to yield significant benefits, including financial gains, risk mitigation and other exit opportunities. The Economic Times was the first to report on HCCB’s listing plans in May.
How does the parent company benefit?
Through such moves, the parent company can reduce exposure to risks associated with bottling companies, which include fluctuations pertaining to raw material, regulatory changes and local market conditions, said Alpana Srivastava, a partner at Desai & Diwanji. While spinning off bottling subsidiaries is more prevalent in the beverage industry, she said other fast-moving consumer goods and retail companies may explore similar strategies to optimise their balance sheets in the current environment.
Earlier this year, HCCB announced the transfer of its bottling operations in three territories in north India to streamline supply chains in the region. However, the bottler declined to comment on its IPO plans.
As part of the transition, the Rajasthan market will be owned and operated by Kandhari Global Beverages, which operates in parts of Delhi, Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, Punjab, Chandigarh, Jammu & Kashmir, and Ladakh.
The Bihar market will be owned and operated by SLMG Beverages Pvt Ltd, which runs bottling operations in Uttarakhand, parts of Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Bihar. The Northeast market and select areas of West Bengal will be owned and operated by Moon Beverages Pvt Ltd, which operates in parts of Delhi and Uttar Pradesh.
What other factors motivate such spin-offs?
Besides providing liquidity for the bottler, listing may offer tax benefits such as reduced capital gains tax or more favourable transfer pricing rules and optimise the overall tax burden for both the parent company and the subsidiary, Srivastava explained. It may allow both entities to be valued more accurately based on their individual capacities in growth, risk profiles and capital intensity.
This comes in the backdrop of companies looking to make the most of a bullish stock market to unlock more value for shareholders by listing their manufacturing subsidiaries. It enables the companies to raise more capital, which can be used to strengthen their market presence and reduce debt, said Devangshu Dutta, founder of Third Eyesight, a management consulting firm. He said the core value generator for companies such as Coca-Cola and Pepsi are brands and marketing rather than manufacturing.
In April, private equity firm Lighthouse Funds invested ₹700 crore in Parsons Nutritionals, a contract manufacturer specialising in packaged foods, beverages, and personal care products, underlining investor appetite in this sector. Other co-investors include the International Finance Corporation, a member of the World Bank Group, Evolvence India, HDFC AMC’s Fund of Funds, and various family offices.
However, there may be legal considerations, too. While exclusive contracts exist, the bottler may have partnerships with other companies in its distribution portfolio, which may have to be reviewed and renegotiated. There may be regulatory compliance and other anticompetitive considerations when it involves such big entities.
Other instances of such moves
While there are fewer examples of bottling companies listed in India, this practice is more common globally. Coca-Cola has listed most of its bottling subsidiaries in other global markets such as North America and Europe.
While there is no shareholding between PepsiCo and Varun Beverages, there is an exclusive arrangement for Varun Beverages to bottle, use trademarks, distribute, market, and sell PepsiCo products across India. The beverage giant benefits from royalty and licence fees. Over the past year, Varun Beverages’ revenue rose 22% to ₹16,400 crore while its profit increased to ₹2,056 crore from ₹1,497 crore in FY22. As of Friday’s close, the bottler’s shares had gained almost 30% to ₹645.20 since the beginning of this year.
Any potential listing opportunity for HCCB may allow a staggered exit for Coca-Cola India from managing local operations, monetising its stake and participating in future licence fees and/or royalty arrangements, said Dhruv Chatterjee, a partner at Saraf and Partners. He added that there are indications in the retail and fast-moving consumer goods category of similar divestments. Coca-Cola India did not respond to Mint’s request for comment.
Ravikumar Distilleries is an example of a listed manufacturing company that has tie-ups with liquor companies Radico Khaitan, Shashi Distilleries and John Distilleries, in addition to manufacturing and marketing its own liquor products. Bengal Beverages is an unlisted bottler that manufactures and distributes non-alcoholic beverage brands under licence from Coca-Cola across categories such as sparkling soft drinks, juice and water.
What kind of contracts exist between the bottler and the parent company?
Many bottling plants are usually set up by companies as a joint venture with a local partner. The bottler procures the concentrate from the companies. About 14-15% of the concentrate cost goes to the bottler, which translates into revenue for the brand, according to a person familiar with such discussions who spoke on condition of anonymity. The company spends a part of this revenue on marketing activities that target mass audiences through television, radio and newspapers.
Depending on the terms of the contract, the bottler may be expected to spend a portion of its revenue on marketing through outdoor settings such as billboards, flyers, social media and events. The arrangement between a bottler and a company may be either a pure bottling arrangement (or contract manufacturing) or a bottling and distribution arrangement, where the bottler is also responsible for marketing, branding, and last-mile distribution.
How has the carbonated beverage market fared?
Market research provider Statista estimated that the carbonated drink market in India clocks about $2.4 billion in revenue and is expected to grow by 6.98% annually over the next four years. The volume consumed at home and other outdoor locations is likely about 4.2 billion litres this year.
In 2022, Parle Agro’s brand Appy Fizz and Coca Cola dominated with a 31% market share each, followed by Fanta, Pepsi, 7UP and Sprite, among others. Other brands such as Reliance-backed Campa Cola are expected to challenge the dominance of these companies.
Before Reliance acquired Campa for ₹22 crore in 2022, the soft drink had been launched by Pure Drinks Group in the 1970s. The group was behind the launch and distribution of Coca-Cola in 1949, before the US company was shunted out of the country in 1977.
Pure Drinks and Campa Beverages subsequently launched Campa Cola to fill the gap left by foreign soft drink companies in the country. However, Coca-Cola and PepsiCo re-entered the Indian market in the 1990s, throttling local competition.
(Published in Mint)
admin
August 31, 2024
MG Arun, India Today
Aug 31, 2024
Nearly five years after the Centre brought in norms to rein in multinational e-commerce companies operating in India, Union commerce minister Piyush Goyal sparked fresh controversy by raising concerns over the rapid expansion of e-commerce. He also drew attention to the pricing strategies used by some e-commerce firms, questioning what he termed “predatory pricing”.
“Are we going to cause huge, social disruption with this massive growth of e-commerce? I don’t see it as a matter of pride that half our market may become part of the e-commerce network 10 years from now; it is a matter of concern,” Goyal said at an event in New Delhi last week.
His comments come at a time when the ecommerce business in India is growing exponentially. Estimated at $83 billion (around Rs 7 lakh crore) as of FY22, the market is expected to grow to $150 billion (Rs 12.6 lakh crore) by FY26. The growth will be due to multiple levers: a growing middle class, rising internet penetration, the proliferation of smartphones, convenience of online shopping and increasing digitisation of payments. The overall Indian retail market was pegged at $820 billion (Rs 69 lakh crore) in 2023, according to a report published by the Boston Consulting Group and the Retailers Association of India. E-commerce still comprises only about 7 per cent of that, as per Invest India.
The Indian e-commerce market is dominated by global giants, including Amazon and Walmart (which took over Flipkart in 2018). They, along with domestic players, offer huge discounted prices compared to retail prices, which drives online sales significantly. In FY23, Amazon Seller Services and Flipkart posted Rs 4,854 crore and Rs 4,891 crore losses, respectively. Goyal’s argument is that these losses are due to their predatory pricing.
“Is predatory pricing policy good for the country?” Goyal asked, while stressing the need for a balanced evaluation of e-commerce’s effects, particularly on traditional retailers such as restaurants, pharmacies and local stores. “I’m not wishing away ecommerce—it’s there to stay,” he said. Later, he said e-commerce uses technology that aids convenience. But there are 100 million small retailers whose livelihood depends on their businesses.
The Centre has specific laws that permit foreign direct investment (FDI) in e-commerce exclusively for business-to-business (B2B) transactions. However, according to Goyal, these laws have not been followed entirely in letter and spirit. Currently, India does not allow FDI in the inventory-based model of e-commerce, where e-commerce entities own and directly sell goods and services to consumers (B2C). FDI is permitted only in firms operating through a marketplace model, where an e-commerce entity provides a platform on a digital or electronic network to facilitate transactions between buyers and sellers (B2B).
The country’s laws also stipulate that in marketplace models, e-commerce entities cannot ‘directly or indirectly influence the sale price of goods or services’ and must maintain a ‘level playing field’. Entities in the marketplace model re allowed to transact with sellers registered on their platform on a B2B basis. However, each seller or its group company is not permitted to sell more than 25 per cent of the total sales of the marketplace model entity.
Goyal said certain structures have been created to suit large e-commerce players with “deep pockets”. Algorithms have been used to drive consumer choice and preference. For instance, several pharmacies have disappeared, he said, and a few large chains are dominating the retail space. He invoked the importance of platforms like the Open Network for Digital Commerce where small businesses can sell their products.
E-commerce firms counter the argument on predatory pricing. “It is the sellers’ discretion as to what price they should sell at,” says an industry source. The e-commerce player who provides the platform seldom has a role in it, he explains. “Sellers could be doing clearance sales or liquidation of old products at cheaper prices. Some sellers also source products at manufacturing cost and park it with e-commerce firms instead of involving warehousing agents. This helps cut their overhead costs and allows them to offer lower prices on the platform,” he adds.
Some experts are of the view that the government should not step in with controls and allow the market forces to play their role in determining prices. Price controls may lead to shortages, inferior product quality and the rise of illegal markets. Moreover, the Competition Commission of India (CCI), which is mandated to act against monopolies, may be given more teeth. It is ironical that, on the one hand, the Centre wants more FDI to flow in, but places more and more controls on foreign players on the other hand. At the core are the interests of small traders and retailers, a key section of the electorate.
Others argue that the government has a role to ensure that there is fair competition. “It is not just small retailers the government would be speaking for, but for large domestic players too,” says Devangshu Dutta, founder of consultancy firm Third Eyesight, emphasising that the government’s role should be to establish laws and practices that promote fairness.
According to him, it is no secret that e-commerce has grown through discounts. “For large e-commerce firms, market acquisition happens by acquiring a share of the consumer’s mind and through pricing. When a large sum is spent on advertisements, it is for acquiring the mind share of the consumer,” he says. “Pricing matters in a big way too. Whether you call it predatory pricing or market acquisition pricing depends on which side of the fence you are.”
(This article was originally published in the India Today edition dated September 9, 2024)
admin
August 9, 2024
Sagar Malviya and Rica Bhattacharyya, Economic Times
9 August 2024, Mumbai
Reliance Industries Ltd. reduced its workforce by 42,000, or nearly 11%, in FY24, in what is being seen as an outcome of a cost-efficiency drive and reduced hiring, especially in its retail segment which also saw store closures and slower expansion.
The employee strength at the country’s largest company by market value, stood at 347,362 in FY24 compared with 389,414 a year ago. The intake of new recruits was slashed by more than a third to 171,116, according to its latest annual report.
“The new lines of businesses (at Reliance) have matured now and have significant support from digital initiatives. Now they are at a stage to better manage the operations with optimum strength,” said an analyst with a leading broking firm, requesting not to be named. “It doesn’t mean that the numbers (of headcount) won’t increase when new business opportunities emerge and strategy changes. They understand very well how to drive cost management and efficiency.”
Most of the job cuts were in its retail business, whose 207,552 employees last fiscal accounted for about 60% of RIL’s total employee strength. The number was 245,581 in FY23.
“Overall voluntary separations in FY24 are lower than FY23. The retail industry typically has a high employee turnover rate, especially in store operations,” RIL said in the report, adding that its employee benefits expense increased by 3% year-on-year to Rs 25,699 crore. In FY23, it had gone up by 33%.
In FY23, Reliance Retail expanded its physical store network, adding more than 3,300 new stores to take the total store count at the end of the year to 18,040. In FY24, the store count stood at 18,836–a net addition of some 800 after factoring in unviable store closures.
Last year, RIL’s online wholesale format JioMart aligned its operations with Metro Cash and Carry, which it acquired. With the addition of Metro’s permanent workforce of 3,500 employees, there was an overlap of roles, both in the backend and online sales operations.
Experts said many of the large conglomerates are rebadging some of the front-end service functions to third-party rolls.
“Many companies in the retail sector have been getting people off their own roles and appointing staffing companies for a leaner structure and efficient management. This may reflect as a drop in headcount (on the company reports) but need not necessarily be loss of jobs,” said Lohit Bhatia, president of workforce management at Quess Corp. “This could include functions such as security guards at the store level, facility management, logistics, picking and packing, etc. That apart, digitisation and tech advancement is also leading to some job roles being redundant across sectors.”
India’s retail sales expansion slowed to 4% last year after a surge in spending across segments—from clothes to cars—in the post-pandemic period, triggered by revenge shopping. Reliance’s retail division, however, grew 18% in sales to Rs 3,06,848 crore.
“Focus on store productivity usually happens in cycles; we have seen consumers unleash their spending post pandemic, which led to retailers expanding their network or square footage. However, if some of the stores are unviable, then management teams are now highly objective, even ruthless, and will shut stores,” said Devangshu Dutta, founder of retail consulting firm Third Eyesight. “In addition, any company planning to list would like to have healthy and lean operations, although we cannot pin-point it to Reliance in this case.”
Another analyst, who did not wish to be named, said, “Reliance’s annual report reveals that the group, spanning petrochemicals, telecom, and retail, has moved beyond its core investment phase and is now poised to reap substantial benefits from operating leverage, efficiency gains, and investments in technology and talent.”
(Published in Economic Times)
admin
February 23, 2024
Kailash Babar & Sagar Malviya, Economic Times
Mumbai, 23 February 2024
Tata Group and Reliance Industries, two of India’s largest conglomerates, are vying for premium retail real estate in Mumbai as they extend their footprints, creating rivalry in a city starved of marquee properties. From Zara and Starbucks to Westside and Titan, the Tata Group occupies nearly 25 million square feet of retail space in India. That is still no match for Reliance Industries that control three times more at 73 million sq ft for more than 100 local and global brands.
But in Mumbai, they are evenly matched, having nearly 3 million sq ft of retail space each. That is a quarter of what is considered the most prime retail real estate in the country, and both the retail giants are looking for more.
“In a modern retail environment, most visible locations contain more successful or larger brands. It just so happens that many of those brands are owned by either Reliance or the Tatas,” said Devangshu Dutta, founder of Third Eyesight, a strategy consulting firm.
“Tatas have been in retail for longer but also slower to scale up compared to Reliance which had this stated ambition of being the most dominant and put the money behind it,” he said.
In a market where demand is much higher than supply, developers and landlords seek to separate the wheat from the chaff, experts said. Ultimately, success in Mumbai’s retail real estate scene hinges on a delicate equilibrium between accommodating industry leaders and fostering a vibrant, varied shopping environment, they said. “In the competitive landscape of retail real estate in Mumbai, commercial developers and mall owners often face the strategic challenge of accommodating prominent retail brands,” said Abhishek Sharma, director, retail, at commercial real estate consultants Knight Frank India.
“These big brands, with a significant market share of 40-45% in the Indian retail sector, can easily be termed as industry giants and possess the potential to command 45-50% of space in any mall,” he said. According to Sharma, there may be perceptions of preferential treatments, but the dynamics are complex, and developers must balance the demand from these major brands with the need for a diverse tenant mix.
Tata Group entered retail in the late 1980s, initially by opening Titan watch stores and a decade later by launching department store Westside. So far, it has about 4,600 stores, including brands such as Tanishq, Starbucks, Westside, Zudio, Zara and Croma.
While Reliance Retail started in 2006, it overcompensated for its late entry by aggressively opening stores across formats. Reliance has over 18,774 stores across supermarkets, electronics, jewellery, and apparel space. It has also either partnered or acquired over 80 global brands, from Gap and Superdry to Balenciaga and Jimmy Choo. A diverse portfolio of brands across various segments through strategic partnerships and collaborations helps an entity like Reliance to leverage synergies and enhance retail presence, especially in malls, experts said.
“The array of brands with Reliance bouquet allows it to enter early into the project and set the tone and positioning of the mall,” said a retail leasing expert who requested not to be identified.
“This positively helps the mall to set its own positioning and future tenant mix. It also helps Reliance place their brands in most relevant zones within the mall. This will emerge as a clear differentiator in a city like Mumbai where brands are already jostling for space, which is the costliest in the country,” the person added.
(Published in Economic Times)
