Amazon.com vs BOL.de

3 12 2008

BOL failed to gain brand recognition around Europe. Only in Germany is the site site relatively successful. It is the number two e-commerce site after Amazon.de – but it lags far behind. In May, 16.9 percent of Web users visited Amazon.de, but only 5.8 percent visited BOL.de.

Overall, Amazon has a much stronger position in Europe than BOL. During the first quarter of 2001, Amazon reported sales of $132 million at its four non-U.S. sites: U.K., France, Germany and Japan. BOL, which had operations in 11 European and five Asian countries, said it expected sales of $79 million (DM180 million) for its fiscal year ending June 30.

Questions:

1. Is it justifiable for a company like Amazon.com to continue investing so much money and effort in a business operation that not only has never made a profit but is incurring heavier losses?

2. Will Bertelsmann benefit (or be hindered) by its physical organizational structure and management processes in its attempt to strengthen its position as an electronic commerce product/service provider? Defend your arguments.

3. In your opinion, what industries/companies would constitute a threat to Amazon.com and/or Bertelsmann’s BOL over the next three to five years? Explain.

4. What success factors do you think are critical for online books (and mass-media) sales and, more generally, for launching an electronic commerce business?





CitiusNet: the emergence of a global electronic market

3 12 2008

Background
CitiusNet is a company that provides a third-party electronic trading system for products that are used in the production and administrative process such as office goods. Providing originally an EDI support system for linking just to one supplier-CitiusNet (by that time CitiusNet operated under the name Brun Passot). In order to fight this drawback the company started to develop a multi-supplier telepurchasing system and launched CITIUS in 1993, the “first European platform for B2B electronic commerce” and evolved to an early Internet marketplace. CitiusNet as the electronic intermediate connected purchasers and suppliers through EDI using a telecommunications network or optionally a VAN. It offered supplier catalogs, catalog management, order management, EDI translation services and payment transactions.

Third Party Marketplace
This emerging model is suitable in case companies wish to leave the Web marketing to a third party (possibly as an add-on to their other channels). They all have in common that they offer at least a user interlace to the suppliers’ product catalogues. Several additional features like branding, payment, logistics, ordering, and ultimately the full scale of secure transactions are added to 3rd parly marketplaces. Revenues can be generated on the basis of one-off membership fee, service fees, transaction fee, or percentage on transaction value. CitiusNet grasps the opportunity by providing necessary services for this model.

The vertical Internet portals or hubs serve as a point of access for companies operating in a specific business field to support business transactions. A vertical portal can also be the platform for different business communities and can support all transaction phases. Particularly used for procurement to lower transaction costs vertical hubs provide product catalogs and supplier listings. Furthermore they might as well offer online brokerage services to find business partners that match best specific supplier or purchaser profiles.

Competitive Advantage
CitiusNet not only moved business from VANs to an Internet marketplace but also built competitive advantage. Three crucial competitive advantages established CitiusNet’s assets. The first is community building. This represents the idea that once a large purchaser is using CitiusNet’s marketplace, its suppliers are pulled to the market as well since they themselves will benefit from putting their catalogs online and thereby generate more business. Secondly, content is important. A rich set of product catalogs will clearly attract more customers. And thirdly control is necessary to identify business processes and requirements in order to be able to add value to the customers’ business process.





Mondus.com

3 12 2008

Mondus has developed a global, online business-to-business marketplace for small and medium-sized businesses. It is one of the first initiatives in the emerging B2B e-marketplaces sector to focus solely on SMEs.

The exploitation of Internet technologies to streamline the ‘request for proposal’ process sits right at the heart of Mondus. As a result, there are greater efficiencies for both buyer and supplier. Suppliers are able to achieve deeper penetration in the SME market, one that has traditionally been costly to impact successfully. Buyers too, without the clout of the big multinational organisations, are able to realise low-cost, high-quality services, and eliminate the inconvenience of identifying vendors and exploring bids.

Mondus’ business model is particularly sophisticated, as demonstrated by its decision to source a partner to design the Web site. This is a complex service requirement that ordinarily demands an understanding of technical and process requirements. The Mondus facility allows SMEs to outline information on both the supplier and the buyer accounts so that the marketplace can make a reasonable judgment as to which company would be best suited to their needs.

It is a measure of the success of the site, which has received $16.7m in investment, that 150,000 people have become registered users since October1999, and have made £32m of purchases in the marketplace. Nearly 700,000 unique users per month at the last count suggests there are substantial growth prospects for the future.

Mondus is the first European online business-to-business marketplace designed exclusively to meet the procurement purchasing needs of small and medium-sized businesses who don’t have extra time to do all the legalwork involved in researching and comparing products, or extra money to waste in making the wrong purchase decisions.

By August 1999, mondus com was valuated at US$60 million. In September 1999, the UK website mondus.co.uk was officially launched. One month later, the US website mondus.com became operational and another venture capitalist, Zouk Ventures, invested US$ 3 million. Since the local telecommunication company could not set up the Internet connection any earlier, the German website mondus.de started in November 1999. Two months later, an office was opened in Paris and mondus’ fourth nationl website, mondus.fr, became available just one year after the initial business plan had been submitted. The company’s original name was mondus.com ltd. On 19 May 2000, it was changed to mondus ltd. Its headquarters were located in Oxford, England.

Timing of case

The name mondus.com had already been registered in 1997. By August 1999, mondus com was valuated at US$60 million, after Eden Capital, a venture capitalist firm, committed US$12 million for the company’s expansion into the US and Germany. The company’s original name was mondus.com ltd. On 19 May 2000, it was changed to mondus ltd. Its headquarters were located in Oxford, England.

Objectives

Mondus was a horizontal web-based B2B marketplace that refers to an application that was offered to a wide range of industries. It aimed at offering a one-stop procurement solution to small and medium sized enterprises by matching buyers and sellers through its website.

The strategy was to register through various marketing tools as many users as possible in order to make the product known to the market.

There were three objectives in creating partnerships: to attract traffic to the mondus site, to complement their services and to support it with technical services. Mondus tried to cooperate with Internet companies that had strong brands in their markets.

From the very beginning mondus focused on its international expansion

Resources (apart from ICT)

Mondus only charged sellers a fee on successful transactions settled through mondus. All services provided to the buyer were free. Initially, sellers were also charged for submitting quotes, but mondus changed its policy to motivate vendors to quote and to increase the number of quotes submitted per RFP.
The transactions fee charged was 2% of the transaction volume. Though originally mondus planned to apply different percentages depending on the product category, it finally preferred to charge a flat fee.

Activities

The mondus’ business model was that B2B markets were mainly buyer driven.
- Multi-catalogue models
- In reverse auctions
- Seller-centric models
- The RFP model (request-for-proposal) was the most flexible solution since it allowed vendors to compete on price and any value added feature.
The matching of buyers and suppliers was a three-step procedure.
Firstly, the buyer placed a request. Secondly, one or more supplier replied to the request by submitting a quote. Thirdly, the buyer viewed all the quotes, if necessary negotiated with the sellers, and accepted or rejected the received quotes.

The above process was facilitated thorough the modus homepage, which was divided into a buy and sell section
In the buy homepage, buyers requested the product or service they needed. In the sell homepage, sellers could view the requests currently submitted and place quotes. All users of the system had a personal noticeboard (my mondus) that informed buyers through the buy noticeboard about their quotes.

Outputs and results

The number of worldwide customers had increased significantly since mondus launched its first Web site in October 1999. As of 8 May 2000, there were 86.892 customers registered World Wide, 76% of whom were buyers. The average number of orders per active buyer was 1.9 (this percentage should be taken qualitatively only since some sellers had also placed RFPs). Active sellers had placed, on average, 9.7 bids.
The average volume of quotes was about US$3000 worldwide; there was data variation from week to week due to the different transaction volumes in the various product and service categories.
Buyer benefits:
- Streamlining the procurement process
- Convenient and easy procedure
- Low investment and costs
- Customisation
- Confidentiality and safety

Seller benefits:
- Access to online trading and new market opportunities
- Using the mondus brand
- Gaining a competitive advantage

Lessons and conclusions

There was a lot of interest in the mondus concept but some quotes were not price competitive and sometimes customers did not get enough quotes.
Most vendors complained that they never got feedback on their quotes. Other suppliers stated that they did not have the time to go through all the RFPs and send quotes for each of them.
It was important to mondus to ensure that sufficient quotes were submitted on RFPs. The idea was to have a lot of power suppliers, which are suppliers that agree to quote on a competitive level and with which mondus develops relationships. It believes that there would be more quotes as the number of sellers grew and customers used the system more frequently.

A major problem was that buyers and sellers only used mondus to get in contact with each other.