Thank you Ross!
While I was reading the post, I wanted to find a way for Nike to increase the on-line presence without the need for Amazon. But with Amazon’s customer base and logistic capabilities, is there a way for a company like Nike to survive without Amazon? Maybe partnering is the correct way to do it now, but just as Amazon think on ways to depend less on Nike, Nike should think on ways to depend less on Amazon.
For example, I wonder if, by providing personalized shoes to customers, Nike could offer unique products in it’s off- line and on-line stores, creating customer loyalty. Maybe Nike should start thinking on ways to collect and use customer data, and start thinking on a digital transformation beyond e-commerce, a transformation involving the entire supply chain (from product development to product delivery to customers) as a way to compete in the new digital world.
Thank you Jean! This post reminded me to the Nokia case, and how a company can lose its competitive advantage by slowing down in the digital transformation process.
It also made me think how hard it is to make decisions when the future is uncertain and there is not recipe that can guarantee success. These two alternatives show feasible paths, so how should we think about choosing one? What framework should we use? I don’t have a clear answer, but I would recommend thinking about:
i) what are the key advantages that OLX has (data, user base, brand?) and which of these alternatives can build on that?
ii) what alternative will create more differentiation/ barriers to entry in the future?
iii) if there are high network effects, are we set in a position to win?
And finally, I thought about a third alternative, selling the company to a big tech. Maybe there’s more to win by selling the data and user base, so that the founders can think about the next Unicorn for Latin America.
Thank you for the post, very interesting! I totally agree with the reasons why Blackberry lost the smartphone war. I also agree with the new CEO’s vision on no longer focusing on phones and targeting software, security, and internet of things. I believe that this is a good way of staying in business. Only one new though on this space, should they still use the brand Blackberry for selling their services? should the company still be named Blackberry? isn’t Blackberry’s brand related to an obsolete and weak technology? Is this the best way to proceed in terms of marketing?
Thank you for your post. I totally agree that the average American mall is dying. Do they have any chance to survive? Maybe, they can find a way to stay in business if they refocus their value proposition tackling a different job to be done. For example, instead of selling goods, and compete with e-commerce, they could start selling experiences and entertainment for customers. Mall of the Americas in Minneapolis illustrates this issue, as they have an amusement park inside the mall (http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2018/01/31/mall-of-america-super-bowl-2018/).
Good post Rob, H&M is a great case of how the a company that disrupted an industry years ago can now be disrupted by digital technology. You recommend to swift to an omni-channel model, in addition to reducing store openings, do you believe that they should reduced the overall number of stores? or should they keep the amount of physical presence to support their brand? Regarding the omni-channel model, I am wondering how difficult it will be to develop the required capabilities to compete in the e-commerce space.