第 344 期首次公开募股与 "前沿理论"
成千上万的淘金者乘坐飞机和轮船来到加利福尼亚，追逐财富。他们被称为 "49人"。1848 年 3 月，800 名非本地人前往加利福尼亚。到1848年底，这一数字激增至2万人。到1849年，这个数字达到了10万。淘金热是美国最早的边疆理论 范例之一。 历史学家弗雷德里克-杰克逊-特纳（Frederick Jackson Turner）于1893年撰写了一篇文章，阐述了美国的经济实力和活力与走向边疆息息相关。
我对 "前沿 "的定义是，在开放式、高潜力的金矿开采中，大量拥有不同技能、教育水平和阶级背景的人在大致平等的条件下并肩工作，由此产生的社会分化。[1]
这条 边界线是已知与未知的分界线，它推动了商业、行为经济学、政府和社会科学领域的创新。当然，现在已经没有任何物理边界了。如今，这条界线已经具象化。对于任何新兴产业而言，这些行为都会以可见和不可预见的方式重复出现。直接面向消费者的品牌已经开始在风险投资的支持下走向成熟。与过去的实体边界一样，这条新的分界线也具有许多相同的特征--不确定性就是其中之一。
在淘金热中，真正赚钱的不是矿工。他们是工具制造商，是为成群结队的矿工制造致富所需工具的工人。 我们记得列维-施特劳斯公司，但很少有人记得当时的顶级金矿工人。工具制造者发财了，而绝大多数矿工却空手而归。他们甚至连工具都没有带回去。俗话说：要么挖金子，要么卖镐头。 与商业工具本身一样，风险资本最终也涌入了品牌零售业。这不仅影响了谁能扩大规模，也影响了公司扩大规模的方式。
不过，所有技术驱动的客户渠道的问题在于，人人都可以使用这些渠道。事实上，当涉及到平台和聚合器时，技术集中的反面就是堆栈中其他所有人的民主化和商品化。截至 2019 年 8 月，共有 175 家不同的在线床垫公司。[2]
在一架从俄亥俄州飞往明尼苏达州的航班上，坐在我右边的是一位推销员，我们称他为戴夫。"你想开一家床垫公司吗？"他似笑非笑地说道。喝完第三杯威士忌后，他打开笔记本电脑，露出一张有近 100 行数据的电子表格，说："看看这个。"我很感兴趣，眼角的余光立刻认出了其中的几家公司。其中，Casper 名列榜首。戴夫是一家为许多顶级品牌生产床垫的公司的员工。我惊呆了。"等等卡斯珀不生产自己的床垫？我问道。戴夫接着问我是否想知道如何开始。我很好奇，他就给我讲了一遍。
建立一个网站，使用 Spotify [SIC] 或其他软件。预售 800 美元的床垫。以 400 至 500 美元的价格从我这里购买。我们会在售出后三周内给你送货。如此反复。
戴夫是众所周知的 "锄头贩子"，DTC 时代是他的淘金热。据他说，卡斯帕是他公司的众多客户之一。我不相信戴夫的话，直到我读了卡斯帕公司的 S-1 文件。他说得没错，卡斯帕公司自己并不生产床垫。近 200 家竞争对手中的绝大多数也不生产床垫。相反，卡斯珀团队从供应商那里购买床垫，然后再标价转售。
虽然我们的大部分产品设计都是内部开发的，但某些泡沫配方目前是根据我们与某些合同制造商签订的生产协议从他们那里获得许可的，其中有些协议包含不同程度的独家代理权。[3]
这家制造商并不是唯一的镐卖家。虽然Casper.com是一个定制购物车，但大多数数字原生代都是在 Shopify 生态系统中建立的。这反映了现代零售业的整体情况，它受到了最伟大的镐卖家的影响。
风险投资以多种方式颠覆了零售业。想象一下，在 20 世纪 90 年代，一位企业家通过筹集风险投资来创办一家服装、鞋类或床垫公司。这种想法是不可思议的。但零售品牌并不是新事物，其工具才是。2006 年以前，这类企业寻求其他资金来源：私人贷款、信用额度或亲朋好友融资。他们在开始时往往认为单位经济效益是最重要的。有些企业决定依靠现金流发展。盈利越早越好。
如果这些公司真的上市了，那也是在几十年后，而不是几年后。拉尔夫-劳伦公司（Ralph Lauren Corporation）成立于 1967 年，30 年后才上市。耐克公司也是如此，这家零售商在成立近 16 年后才上市。在俄亥俄州哥伦布市，也有许多专业零售商走过了同样漫长的上市之路：Express、L Brands、DSW 和 Abercrombie & Fitch就是其中几家。
推特上的网络史密斯
关于品牌上限和价值。1967:RL 成立。1994：高盛以 5.2 亿美元的估值收购了 @RalphLauren 28% 的股份。1997:RL 在 30 年后以 24 亿美元的估值首次公开募股--其中有不少是亏损的。2020：88 亿美元市值（1.3 倍收入） 摘自 S-1：
就像寒武纪大爆发 一样， 风险投资为各种平台、应用程序、物流服务和包装解决方案打开了大门。它还开发了一种新的零售业态，一种基于超高速增长的零售业态。进而，风险资本家开始为建立在此基础上的公司提供资金。对于未来的零售业创始人来说，创业门槛达到了历史最低点。而在同一时期，风险资本的融资能力也达到了历史最高点：2014 年。过去十年的电子商务既是工具的销售，也是金块的挖掘。
不过，虽然风险投资对镐头的破坏是好的，但也可以说它对矿工的破坏是坏的。在 DTC 时代，并购很少，上市更少。即便如此，Stitch Fix 总裁迈克-史密斯（Mike Smith）认为，保持私有化是许多此类品牌的最佳选择。他向Recode 的Jason Del Rey 解释道：
你应该成为一家上市公司吗？在很多情况下，我的答案是否定的。你必须在公开市场上拿出你的看家本领。你可以躲在私人市场，把大量风险资本花在 Facebook 上。
对于今天的数字原生品牌来说，当他们接近新的前沿领域时，他们的思维和行为将与当代同行大不相同。因此，Casper 的首次公开募股将成为数字原生品牌时代的风向标。在没有现实盈利途径的情况下，它们能上市吗？这种想法有其不利因素。在下面这些推文中，我总结了大部分熊市论点。
无标题
无说明
卡斯珀的管理层必须让华尔街相信，他们有能力做到很少有品牌做不到的事情：他们必须 "拥有这个品类"，并且能够盈利。这其中有两个障碍。这就有点技术性了。
相似之处卡斯珀和床垫公司
基于消费者的企业估值。 在公司的 S-1 中，他们选择不报告同期收入数据。但有几个关键数据非常突出14%的顾客在购买后一年内退货。在 S-1 报告中，Casper 引用的是回头客，而不是销售额。据风险投资家亚历克斯-陶西格（Alex Taussig）称，该公司的年美元留存率仅为 6%。他们的回头客几乎为零。
根据市场营销学教授丹尼尔-麦卡锡（Daniel McCarthy）的研究，Casper 的平均订单价值（AOV）为 867 美元，重复 AOV 为 87 美元。这是基于 80% 的订单都是主要 AOV，重复 AOV 为 87 美元的假设。867 美元销售额的客户获取成本（CAC）为 324 美元。 在引人入胜的营销数学中，麦卡锡教授列举了五年客户价值为 455 美元，终身价值（LTV）为 131 美元：
看涨者可能会指出，商店是降低 CAC、追加销售和提高供应链效率利润率的一种方式。熊市则会指出，后期采用者更难引入，竞争也会加剧。
回到我们开始的地方。 卡斯珀以直接面向消费者的送货方式颠覆了传统零售业，而现在，它的最大希望是实体零售业。在 Casper 推出的一年内，出现了两起值得注意的事件。当然，Casper 很快就扩大了其直接面向消费者的模式。而床垫公司（Mattress Firm）则投资了一家实体公司，因为卡斯珀的 DTC 产品在第一年就创造了近 1 亿美元的销售额。
[床垫公司]在2015年以7.8亿美元收购零售连锁店Sleepy's的决定制约了它的发展。Mattress Firm没有投资数字工具和运输基础设施，而是在错误的时机扩大了门店数量。[4]
Mattress Firm 的零售收购使该公司的零售店数量过多（近 1000 家），而当时床垫盒装零售的客户收购套利正达到顶峰。仅一年后，Steinhoff International 以约 1 倍的总收入收购了 Mattress Firm。
南非零售商斯坦霍夫国际控股公司（Steinhoff International Holdings）和美国最大的专业床上用品零售商 Mattress Firm Holding Corporation 周日表示，双方将以 38 亿美元（包括债务）的价格收购该公司。这笔交易将创建全球最大的床垫零售分销公司。[5]
2018 年，Mattress Firm 申请破产保护，开始重组进程，关闭了公司 3230 家门店中的近 700 家。实际上，破产开始抵消了 2015 年收购Sleepy的糟糕时机。随着 Mattress Firm 的收缩，Casper 希望获得自己的份额。根据卡斯珀的 S-1，实体零售是其增长的主要组成部分。
事实证明，我们在实体零售店的业务与我们的电子商务渠道相辅相成，因为我们相信与多种渠道的互动产生了协同 "网络效应"，从而提高了整个系统的销售额。零售店扩张的持续成功将对我们未来的增长和盈利能力做出重要贡献。
问题在于，卡斯珀能否说服华尔街的投资者，让他们相信他们攫取 Mattress Firm 价值的计划是可行的。虽然卡斯珀的睡眠经济愿景更为宏大，但 Mattress Firm 2019 年的年收入为 32 亿美元（根据 Steinhoff International 的数据）。为了抓住这一机遇，他们可能必须从内到外重建公司。
卡斯帕公司拥有近 700 名员工，没有自己的产品制造部门，是一家不生产自己产品的大型产品公司。这一点在其一般及行政费用类别中显而易见。卡斯珀的一般及行政开支是销售额相近的紫罗兰的 5 倍（1.062 亿美元对 1910 万美元）。为了抓住现有竞争者的价值，抵御挑战者，卡斯帕必须提高竞争力。卡斯帕要想成为 "品类拥有者"，就必须在内部变得更像耐克。耐克创始人兼首席执行官菲尔-奈特（Phil Knight）说得好
战胜竞争对手相对容易。战胜自己则是一项永无止境的承诺。
更精益求精的 "睡眠耐克"
比较始于《福布斯》上的一段话。2016 年，也就是 Mattress Firm 被收购的同一年，Casper 的联合创始人 Luke Sherwin 阐述了他对公司的愿景。在接受罗恩-罗夫（Ron Rofe）的采访时，谢尔文解释道：
卡斯伯对睡眠的贡献就像耐克对运动的贡献一样。我们希望让睡眠成为一种生活方式，让睡眠环境成为您生活的重要组成部分。
在提交的证券文件中，卡斯珀通过扩大床垫以外的可寻址市场总量，为解决产品商品问题奠定了基础：
随着健康等式越来越多地包括睡眠，睡眠业务也在不断增长，并演变成我们所说的睡眠经济。我们正在帮助加速这一转变。我们的使命是唤醒一个充分休息的世界的潜力，我们希望卡斯珀成为改善我们睡眠方式的一流产品和体验的顶级品牌。
耐克公司拥有 17.9%的鞋类产品，其营销和广告支出占总收入的 10%。卡斯珀拥有 5%的床垫，却将高达 33%的收入用于市场营销。如果没有资本效率和短期盈利能力，Casper 就无法模仿它所向往的品牌。要想成为 "睡眠界的耐克"，卡斯帕必须变得更像营销和销售界的耐克。他们必须在高效获取客户的能力方面领先于行业。我的建议很简单：完全抛弃 DTC 行业。有了与亚马逊、塔吉特、沃尔玛和好市多（Costco）的合作作为坚实的基础，卡斯伯可以通过以下方式向更精简、更有利可图的模式转变：
- 强调与第三方销售商的销售和分销关系
- 从短期绩效营销转向品牌营销战略
尽管卡斯珀的融资估值已达 11 亿美元，但就在 2019 年 3 月，该领域内及其周边的大多数公司的 EBITDA 或收入的交易价格为 10-20 倍或 1-2 倍。对 Casper 来说，这意味着初始市值为 5-6 亿美元（他们已融资 3.39 亿美元）。仅在这份报告中，就有两个可比公司值得考虑：拉尔夫-劳伦公司（Ralph Lauren）的息税折旧摊销前利润为 1.4 亿美元，市值达 20 亿美元。Mattress Firm 上市一年后，市值为 19.1 亿美元，EBITDA 为 24 倍。
为了实现盈利，Casper 必须 "战胜自己"，就像战胜市场上的其他挑战者和现有竞争者一样。他们必须像以前的早期零售商一样建立自己的公司，那时候风险资本还不充裕，CAC 也还没有上升。只要每年将总务和行政开支减少哪怕 5000 万美元，他们就能接近收支平衡。通过将营销支出从数字优先转向第三方合作，Casper 可以在第一年就实现息税折旧摊销前利润（EBITDA）正增长。
卡斯珀采用了多年来一直困扰 DTC 行业的技术邻近型模式：募集巨额资金、在纽约或洛杉矶设立办事处、过多的营销支出（相对于总收入而言）、高昂的高管薪酬、优质房地产租赁以及初创企业的福利待遇。通过减少这些开支并转向第三方销售，Casper 可以成为向华尔街宣传的上市品牌。Mattress Firm 等现有竞争对手将欢迎 Casper 与Sleepy's、Purple 等公司合作。与上述每一家零售商合作，卡斯珀都能为他们的商店带来新的顾客。
以 5000 多万美元的息税折旧摊销前利润（EBITDA）计算，Casper 将成为他们憧憬的价值 10 亿美元的品牌。就像开疆拓土的淘金者一样，菲利普-克里姆（Philip Krim）和他的团队可以为Away和Glossier这两个有IPO意向的数字原生品牌规划前进的道路。为了在公开市场上竞争，这些品牌必须以更传统的方式运营。
DTC 时代经历了十年不择手段的营销和往往被过多风险资本掩盖的低效运营。作为私营公司，只要能筹集到资金，这种情况就会持续下去。但现在，它们已经走到了尽头。这在某种程度上是对 DTC 行业的一次清算。当矿工们来到这里时，他们通常会选择把带来的东西放在一边。对一些人来说，那是贵重物品，而对其他人来说，那是自我价值的膨胀感。在边疆地区，牺牲和不适是必须的，关键在于你用那把昂贵的镐头带回家的是什么。
研究与报告：Web Smith | 编辑：Carolyn Penner |关于 2PM
注： 在此订阅，将于美国东部时间周二下午 2 点收到第 344 号信件。
第 340 期：机动性碰撞课程
Steve Jobs believed that one of the few things that separated humans from high primates was our ability to build tools. In some cases, these tools mitigated the crippling inferiority of human mobility. Compared to some animals, humans possess lesser top end speed, endurance, and efficiency of movement. It’s our ability to engineer solutions that ultimately improves our collective mobility. Jobs assessed these shortcomings in a 1995 interview:
I read a study that measured the efficiency of locomotion for various species on the planet. The condor used the least energy to move a kilometer. And, humans came in with a rather unimpressive showing, about a third of the way down the list. It was not too proud a showing for the crown of creation.
Over the course of Jobs’ career, he predicted the future quite a few times. He foresaw what the inter connectivity of internet would do for humanity. He predicted the efficacy of the computer’s mouse, and the dawn of cloud computing, and the professional preference of the laptop computer. Jobs even understood that the diffusion of this technology would be so profound that ten year olds would own computers that are orders more powerful than the ones used by 1960’s-era NASA engineers. But it was perhaps his two distinct thoughts on figurative and literal mobility that may go on to define the next ten years of disruption.
Jobs indirectly recognized the inverse relationship between online retail and shopping centers:
The second thought expounded on his obsession with human physical efficiency:
Somebody at Scientific American had the insight to test the efficiency of locomotion for a man on a bicycle. And, a man on a bicycle, a human on a bicycle, blew the condor away, completely off the top of the charts.
This line of thinking is the origin of Jobs’ commentary on the personal computer serving as a proverbial bicycle for the mind. According to Jobs, “What a computer is to me, is it’s the most remarkable tool we’ve ever come up with. It’s the equivalent of a bicycle for our minds. Walking is relatively slow and inefficient.” This remarkable thought may end up meaning something more than what Jobs meant at the time.
The advancement of mobile payment technology and the evolution of physical mobility are on a collision course. The diffusion of one technology may lead to the diminishing of the other. There is no greater example of the potential disruption than China’s stark contrast to the nature of American retail. Cashless consumer economies will have a profound effect on mobility.
Many Chinese cities are now the closest we have to cashless consumer economies.
According to eMarketer’s Shelleen Shum: 79.3% of smartphone users in China will operate within a completely cashless economy. By comparison, the United States will see just 23% of smartphone users doing so by 2021. And Germany will have just 15%. Why is this significant? The move towards a cashless economy corresponds with a shift in mobility preferences. “The use of digital technologies—from smartphones and wearables to artificial intelligence and driverless cars—is rapidly transforming how city dwellers shop, travel, and live.Without a firm foundation in electronic payments, cities will not be able to fully capture their digital future, according to our analysis,” said Lou Celi, Head of the Roubini ThoughtLab.
无标题
Mobile payments are influencing a collision course. No. 1 market for mCommerce (payments) is China. Here is a quick comparison. Mobility:1a/ US cars per 1000: 8381b/ China’s cars per 1000: 179Retail locations:2a/ US sq. ft. / person: 23.5 2b/ China sq. ft. / person: 2.8
And here is the key question. If the United States is moving towards a cashless society driven by mobile wallets and smartphone-driven payments systems, will the shape of our economy begin to change with it? The data affirms. The shuttering of American retailers outpaced all of 2018 by April of 2019 according to data from Coresight Research. As of now, the correlation does not rely upon mobile payment tech. Rather, it’s driven by the growing adoption of online retail. However, online retail adoption in China is driven by mobile payment technologies. American adoption of such technologies will accelerate overall growth. The percentage of retail in the form of eCommerce will hockey stick when it does.
Smart Cities and Urban Mobility
There may not be a greater example of the potential clash between online retail and mobility than the city that is quietly known for its specialty retailers. In retail circles, Columbus is known as HQ City; the Central Ohio region is host to Abercrombie & Fitch (and Hollister), L Brands (Victoria’s Secret, Bath & Body Works, etc.), Express, Ascena Retail Group (Limited, Justice), DSW, Value City Furniture, and ties to American Eagle Outfitters. There isn’t a mall in the United States that isn’t influenced by this region’s businesses.
For Columbus, it’s a double-edged sword. The city’s working population is heavily influenced by this small group of very large employers. And these large employers have a symbiotic relationship with America’s inflated 23.5 square feet of retail real estate / person. In comparison, China has just 2.8 square feet of retail / person. Despite this lacking physical infrastructure, China passed the United States as the number one retail market in 2019. [1]
In 2015, Columbus, Ohio applied for a national grant for the Smart City Challenge, a national competition between a collective of technologically progressive cities.
Smart Columbus will help shift travel patterns. Even more, we want to shift people’s thought patterns and behavior. This means inspiring policy makers and influencing people’s preferences. We will partner with others to create programs, introduce new solutions and promote adoption. Once our city understands what’s possible, everybody should be able to get on board. This will be a gradual process over the coming decade. As a region with urban sprawl, we are committing to a new, improved ecosystem of solutions to move people and goods. [2]
A smart city is tasked with testing technological solutions and progressive policies to innovate mobility practices. As the winner of the first-ever Smart City Challenge, the city agreed to embrace the “reinvention of transportation to accelerate human progress.” The city would then serve as a standard bearer to other cities as they continue to evolve. In 2017, the city outwitted dozens of other top cities to include: Pittsburgh, San Francisco, Portland, Kansas City, Austin, and Denver. The result was an award of a combined $50 million grant from the US Department of Transportation and the Paul Allen Foundation. This award would then be amplified by hundreds of millions in public-private partnership, generated by the cities own businesses and political partnerships.
Through the Smart City Challenge, the Department committed up to $40 million to one winning city. In response, cities leveraged an additional $500 million in private and public funding to help make their Smart City visions real. [3]
The data suggests that the advancement of eCommerce adoption would influence mass transit and ride sharing as primary means of urban travel. This same data would suggest that eCommerce would also spur economic development in harder to reach areas of the region. But it would have to get much worse before conditions improve. Some 92% of the citizens in China’s largest cities use Alipay or Wechat as their mobile wallets and sole means of transacting. In rural China, that number is 47%. In both cases, the primary means of retail is through eCommerce channels. In contrast, America will see just 12.4% of retail by eCommerce in 2020. For rural citizens and underbanked Americans, that number is significantly lower. The majority of eCommerce transactions are located in or near major metropolitan areas. This is relevant and will be explained shortly.
Black Friday 2019
In September of 2017, the proverbial floodgates opened. Amazon’s patent for one-click purchasing expired. With this, any and every online retailer could build or integrate payments solutions to promote better consumer experiences on desktop and mobile platforms. The improved experiences were especially noticeable on mobile operating systems, where dropped carts were commonly 60+%.
The end of Amazon’s hold on one-click ordering gives opportunities to large and small retailers to reap benefits they haven’t had before. Perhaps the most widespread benefit will come in the world of mobile commerce where there are high rates of cart and purchasing abandonment. […] The patent expiration will allow for widespread adoption of one-click purchasing, which will challenge the market to adapt quickly. There is an opportunity for major reconfiguration of social networks to challenge major e-commerce giants such as Amazon. [4]
This coincided with the integration of tools like Apple Pay, Android Pay, and Shopify Pay, three solutions that would fuel mobile commerce in ways that were only previously seen in Chinese markets. Apple Pay recently crossed Paypal in volume of transactions. Amazon’s YoY growth was closely tied to the stickiness of similar technologies. An unnamed Shopify analyst suggested that with Shopify Pay, conversion rates were nearly identical to Amazon’s – an extraordinary improvement in performance between 2016 and 2019.
Over this most recent retail holiday, there was a contrast to observe. In 2PM’s most recent Executive Member Report, I explain the context behind the title “The Blackest Friday.” According to data pulled from Alibaba, Amazon, and Shopify – Black Friday was a success for the burgeoning eCommerce ecosystem and a disappointment to traditional retailers like Kohl’s, JCP, and Nordstrom. The holiday shed light on the growing divide between mobile adoption and the dependence on traditional retailers.
无标题
It wasn’t deals that drove the BF, it was ease of purchase. Via Adobe Analytics: 1/ 39% of eCom: mobile2/ 61% of traffic: mobileAnd Shopify added 400k stores in 2019. The avg. BF $ / merchant dropped just 1.8%. Payments ease mitigated the lack of trust or perceived value.
Adobe, which now owns Magento, revealed data that communicates a permanent shift toward mobile traffic (61% mobile). Shopify’s data (69% mobile) reflected the same. Physical retail continued to slip.
The drop in Black Friday physical shopping mirrors a year-long share pullback in departments stores including Macy’s, Kohl’s and Foot Locker, all of which are down more than 25% this year. Meanwhile, Amazon, the dominant U.S. e-commerce retailer, has gained about 20% this year. [5]
For Shopify, the result was especially positive. On the heels of Apple Pay adoption and the growth of Shopify Pay, the company added 400,000 new stores in 2019 while dropping just 1.8% in average store revenue on Black Friday. This tells a story. Despite the relative infancy of nearly 40% of the stores on the platform, new merchants were able to generate nearly enough in sales volume to match the per capita avg sales figure of the previous year’s merchants. This would indicate that the shift away from desktop and towards mobile payments mitigated issues of trust or early-stage brand equity concerns by lifting conversion rates. As mobile payment adoption increases, the divide between DTC-minded brands and traditional retailers will continue to grow. So where does this get us?
Conclusion: On Primates and Politics
If you’ve ever frequented Amazon Prime Now, you understand the value of two hours saved. In a matter of 90 seconds, you can click through on recently purchased grocery items to replenish your pantries. Then, in a matter of 60-90 minutes, those selections manifest. There are four packages at your door. When Steve Jobs suggested that software engineering would impact our mobility, it’s unlikely that he imagined the effect that mobile commerce would have on developed cities. Mobility isn’t just the efficiency, speed, or distance traveled. It’s what we can do with our time. Mobility is freedom.
When Columbus, Ohio was awarded $50 million to build the blueprint for a smart city, it’s unlikely that the city’s leaders understood the ties between commerce technology and physical mobility. If so, the heaviest investments would have been earmarked for commerce infrastructure:
- improving shipping lanes by designating key routes for delivery vehicles and couriers
- retrofitting struggling malls and shopping centers as fulfillment hubs
- investing in the numerous local businesses by equipping them with the same types of technologies that enable the DTC mobile revolution
- repurposing successful malls as meeting grounds, deemphasizing the emphasis on shopping
- and laying the groundwork for a city with 60-80% fewer cars and 70-90% fewer shopping centers
America is over-retailed. And unfortunately, innovation in online retail will exacerbate this. For Columbus (and many other forward-thinking cities), this is a conflict of interest. As regions shift toward mobile commerce-forward models, old ways of retailing will subside. And given early data – the numerous retailers that are headquartered in and around the city would be placed at existential risk.
It’s for this reason that Columbus serves a microcosm of traditional retail as a whole. The industry will have to choose between its past and its future, both of which are tied to shifts in mobility innovation. Like Jobs said in 1995: “People are going to stop going to a lot of stores. And they’re going to buy stuff over the web.” This is beginning to reflect in public and private markets. What happens when we stop driving to stores? What happens when shopping centers no longer have sufficient demand? What happens when advancements in last-mile delivery becomes carbon negative? This is happening now.
The largest retail economy in the world is no longer the United States. But this will potentially change, as the United States closes the gap in mobile computing and payments adoption. China has 10% of the retail square footage and 79% fewer cars. This should give us pause. These numbers provide a bit of foresight into how this country must adapt to modern retail. Computers did become the bicycles for our minds. And now, advancements in mobile computing and payments are influencing physical mobility. The smartest cities will correct for these advancements before the markets correct it for them.
Research and Report by Web Smith | About 2PM