2015年8月4日 星期二

Bigger Is Not Always Better - Why Amazon Is Worth More Than Walmart【通路】

Bigger Is Not Always Better - Why Amazon Is Worth More Than Walmart

This week an important event happened on Wall Street. The value of Amazon (~$248 billion) exceeded the value of Walmart (~$233 billion). Given that Walmart is world’s largest retailer, it is pretty amazing that a company launched as an online bookseller by a former banker only 21 years ago could be worth more than what has long been retailing’s juggernaut.
Walmart redefined retail.  Prior to Sam Walton’s dynasty, retailing was an industry of department stores and independent retailers. Retailing was a lot of small operators, primarily highly regional. Most retailers specialized, and shoppers would visit several stores to obtain things they needed.

But Walmart changed that. Sam Walton had a vision of consolidating products into larger stores and opening these larger stores in every town across America. He set out to create scale advantages in purchasing everything from goods for resale to materials for store construction. And with those advantages he offered customers lower prices, to lure them away from the small retailers they formerly visited.
And customers were lured. Today there are very few independent retailers. WalMart has ~$488 billion in annual revenues. That is more than four times the size of no. 2 Costco, or no. 1 in France (no. 3 in world) Carrefour, or no. 1 in Germany (no. 4 in world) Schwarz, or no. 1 in U.K. (no. 5 in world) Tesco. Walmart directly employes ~0.5% of the entire USA population (about one in every 200 people work for Walmart). And it is a given that nobody living in America is unaware of Walmart, and very, very few have never shopped there.
140805_HO_OutAmazonBut, Walmart has stopped growing. Since 2011, its revenues have grown unevenly, and on average less than 4% per year. Worse, it’s profits have grown only 1% per year. Walmart generates ~$220,000 revenue per employee, while Costco achieves ~$595,000. Thus Walmart needs to keep wages and benefits low, and chronically hammer on suppliers for lower prices as it strives to improve margins.
But worse, the market is shifting away from Walmart’s huge, plentiful stores toward on-line shopping.  And this could have devastating consequences for Walmart, due to what economists call “marginal economics.”
Why “Scale” Becomes A Disadvantage If You Don’t Grow Revenue
As a retailer, Walmart spends 75 cents out of every revenue dollar on the stuff it sells (cost of goods sold). That leaves it a gross margin of 25 cents – or 25%. But, all those stores, distribution centers and trucks create a huge fixed cost, representing 20% of revenue. Thus, the net profit margin before taxes is a mere 5% (Walmart has for years made about 5 cents on every $1 revenue).
But, as sales shift from brick-and-mortar to online, this threatens the revenue base. At Sears, for example, revenues per store have been declining for over four years. Suppose that starts to happen at Walmart; a slow decline in revenues. If revenues drop by 10% then every $100 of revenue shrinks to $90. And the gross margin (25%) declines to $22.50. But those pesky store costs remain stubbornly fixed at $20. So profits drop to $2.50 – a 50% decline from what they were before.
A relatively small decline in revenue (10%) has a five times impact on the bottom line (50% decline). The “marginal revenue” is that lost 10%. What the company achieves “on the margin.” It has enormous impact on profits. And now you know why retailers are open seven days a week, and 18 to 24 hours per day. They all desperately want those last few “marginal revenue dollars” because they are what makes – or breaks – their profitability.
All those scale advantages Sam Walton created go into reverse if revenues decline. Now the big centralized purchasing, the huge distribution centers and all those big stores suddenly become a cost Walmart cannot avoid. Without growing revenues, Walmart, like has happened at Sears, could go into a terrible profit tailspin.
Amazon Changes The Retail Business Model
And that is what Amazon is trying to do. Amazon is again changing the way Americans shop, from stores to online. And the key to understanding why this is deadly to Walmart and other big traditional retailers is understanding that all Amazon (and its on-line brethren) need to do is chip away at a few percentage points of the market. They don’t have to obtain half of retail. By stealing just 5-10% they put many retailers, the ones who are weak, right out of business, like Radio Shack and Circuit City. And they suck the profits out of others like Sears and Best Buy. And they pose a serious threat to Walmart.
And Amazon is succeeding. It has grown at almost 30% per year since 2010. That growth has not been due to market growth, it has been created by stealing sales from traditional retailers. Many retailers have suffered serious sales declines. Furthermore, Amazon achieves $621,000 revenue per employee, while having a far lower fixed cost footprint.
What the marketplace looks for is that point at which the shift to on-line is dramatic enough to become a “tipping point” changing the industry economics. There will be a point when online retailers have enough share that suddenly the fixed cost heavy traditional retail business model is no longer supportable. At that point brick-and-mortar retailers will have lost just enough share that their profits start the big slide backward toward losses. Simultaneously, the profits of online retailers will start to gain significant upward momentum.
This week, the marketplace started saying that time could be quite near. Amazon had a small profit, surprising many analysts. It’s revenues are now almost as big as Costco and Tesco – and bigger than Target and Home Depot. If it’s pace of growth continues, then the value which was once captured in Walmart stock will shift, along with the marketplace, to Amazon’s shareholders.
In May, 2010 Apple’s value eclipsed Microsoft. Five years later, Apple is now worth double Microsoft – even though its earnings multiple (stock Price/Earnings) is only half (AAPL P/E = 14.4, MSFT = 31). Apple’s revenues are double Microsoft’s, and Apple’s revenues per employee are $2.4 million, three times Microsoft’s $731,000.
While Microsoft has about doubled in value since the valuation pinnacle transferred to Apple, investors would have done better holding Apple stock as it has more than tripled. And if the multiple equalizes between the companies (Apple’s goes up, or Microsoft’s goes down), which will happen at some point in the future, Apple investors will be six times better off than Microsoft’s.
Market shifts are a bit like earthquakes. Lots of pressure builds up over a long time. There are small tremors, but for the most part nobody notices much change. The land may actually have risen or fallen a few feet, but it is not noticeable due to small changes over a long time. But then, things pop. And the world quickly changes.
This week investors started telling us that the time for big change could be happening very soon in retail. And if it does, Walmart’s size will be more of a disadvantage than benefit.
Learn more about my public speaking, Board involvement and growth consulting at www.AdamHartung.com, or connect with me on LinkedIn,Facebook  and Twitter.   
Links to more info:

沒有留言:

張貼留言

MIT黃金創業課:做對24步,系統性打造成功企業【創業】

Step0   起點 Step1   市場區隔 Step2   灘頭堡市場 Step3   終端使用者檔案 Step4   灘頭堡的總市場規模 Step5   代言人 Step6   生命週期使用案例 Step7   高層次的產品規格 Step8   量化價值主張 Step9  ...