Log in



Categories » ‘Build Ecommerce’

Why did it Webvan fail?

Webvan failed because of the inability of the company to support its capital intensive operations and overall nonviable business model.
Grocery industry is known for having very narrow margins so the only way for grocery stores (online or not) to sustain its profitability is buying selling more products (economies of scale) while minimizing costs and ensuring efficient operations. Webvan built a very complex and expensive technology to operate its Oakland distribution center and paid astronomical amounts of money to its suppliers to ensure 30 minute delivery window and freshness of the products. All these expenses could have been offset only by attracting large amount of customers or having great margins. Since great margins in grocery industry are out of the question, attracting large number of customers was the only option for Webvan to succeed. Customers did not transition into a new habit buying groceries as swiftly as it was originally planned due to several reasons. I think that inability of customers to evaluate the products visually or by touch as well as customers’ demand for high standards contributed to unwillingness to adopt new habit. Therefore, low customer penetration rate and capital intensive operations were main reasons for Webvan’s inability to expand and subsequent failure. . 


Should Yelp be threatened by Google Hotpot?

I do think Google is going to take away a part of Yelp’s customers particularly because of a quick and more convenient functionality. I believe that people that are looking for a quick rating of a particular place and that are interested mainly in the type of restaurant not so much in details such as decor or special food items will be Google’s main type of customer.  Google Hotpot offers a very convenient feature where different places are recommended to you based on your previous searches. This concept works great with many retail sites or even movies. In my opinion, this will also work with Google Hotpot, but when it comes to food, it’s not going to be everyone’s cup of tea. I believe there is a large market of people who are very much into their food; communicating about their food with fellow foodies or reading paragraphs of information about a ravioli dish is NOT a hassle for this group of people it’s an enjoyable experience. TV shows such as Top Chef, Bizarre Foods, No reservations, pretty much any food competition show on Food Network really show the scale of the obsession a lot of people have with their food willing to sacrifice their personal time in order to watch how authentic duck soup is made in France. These people love to watch the shows about food, talk about their food, and they love to write about their food. Yelp managed to establish communities of people that carefully write their reviews for other people knowing that these reviews are valued and appreciated within this community.  Yelp is not a search engine; it’s a place where people with similar preferences support local businesses, share advices, jokes and ideas.  Therefore, I think Yelp needs to concentrate on this particular niche market and accentuate its differentiating factor from Google Hotpot. In addition, Yelp’s success is built on, apart from the technology aspects of it, honesty and transparency and it’s crucial for Yelp to maintain this level of trust in order to continue successfully attracting new users.

TM vs MJ

Some of the challenges facing Internet startups as compared to brick-and-mortar companies include:

  • Developing trust between consumers and online brands is a challenging process because consumers are reluctant to switch to something unfamiliar. It’s often easier to stick to old habits only because they proved to work and are safe. Online companies often have to be very creative in their marketing in order to encourage adoption. Taxi Magic’s partnership with Heineken is a great example how TM leveraged brand loyal consumers of Heineken to reduce the “risk” associated with adopting new habit.  Music Juice, on the other hand, simply assumed that the Dutch model is going to work in the US and failed to generate interest in public.
  • There are concerns consumer has to overcome when providing personal information/credit card number to the online site. TM recognized this problem when they made a decision to stop asking consumers for their credit card and giving them the option to pay cash. Consequently, they saw a significant increase in sales after this change was carried out. MJ again failed to research consumer behavior and did not adjust their model even when they recognized things were not going well.  They could for example partner up with Amazon or iTunes to generate more “buzz” or encourage voting to ensure that only musicians selected by the public are eligible to raise funds.
  • Consumers do not receive their purchase instantly often having to wait for days for their purchase to arrive. To counterbalance this issue companies have to provide benefits that are not attainable in brick-and-mortar stores such as more product variety, convenience of shopping, and price flexibility. TM knew that the only way consumers were going to switch to ordering taxi on their smart phones is by ensuring that it is more convenient than to call for a cab. Not only TM provides the functionality of ordering taxi in minutes but also creates an image of safety and transparency. Therefore, providing additional benefits other than benefits provided by brick-and-mortar shops is a good way to ensure success and a more rapid adoption.
  • Competition is a challenge as well since it is easier to build a website than it is to start and maintain a brick-and-mortar business. One way for an online company to block itself from the competition is to build a strong brand, aggressively market it to consumers and initiate “lock in” where it would no longer be economically feasible for users to switch to other brands.  Although TM did not spend considerable resources on marketing it was able to build technologically superior product that instantly create a “buzz” among “influencers”. In today’s social media driven world, it was enough to create a very substantial users base and achieve exposure in media. Strong brand, “sexy-taxi” layout of the app and loyal consumers made it possible for TM to maintain their leading position in the market even though there are more than a hundred other competitors that provide similar services. MJ, on the other hand failed to do either, build a strong brand through marketing or produce a technologically superb product. Their website is unappealing and confusing creating a “blurry” image in terms of their value proposition.

So what was the main reason behind TM’s success?

I read an interesting article last semester for Entrepreneurship course about the way venture capitalists evaluate new ventures. A number of the most influential venture capitalists were interviewed and asked about what they viewed as most important things they look at when evaluating potential venture opportunities. Apart from the important factors such as large addressable market, sustainable competitive advantage, timing, pain ladder (need in the market) and business model, everyone agreed that human relationships are crucial for project’s success.  Most of the interviewed venture capitalists are looking for a reliable team, committed people who understand the whole thrust behind the technology and the industry dynamic behind it. There has to be a vision, execution, sales, experience and entrepreneurship in the team. Venture capitalists spend a lot of time with entrepreneurs and their team evaluating whether there is a real connection between the teammates, what are their biases and their experience. I believe the main success factor of TM was extensive expertise provided by the founders of the company, family-like atmosphere and continuous enthusiasm to try new things and explore new opportunities. The founders of MJ, on the other hand, did not have experience in building online ventures or in Internet marketing, things that are essential for success of this type of e-Business. Their deteriorating relationship and lack of motivation contributed to the failure of the business.