The new kid on the block, Sharing Economy!

It was only a decade ago when the Nokia 1100 family of GSM phones was still the world’s best-selling handset (largely contributed by huge sales in developing nations). Nokia phones were known for their ruggedness and became the subject of many memes, my favourite being the one claiming that the phones “could only be destroyed in the fires of Mordor.” Mobile phones were fast becoming ubiquitous items. At the same time, a new generation of mobile telecommunication technology was also fast being deployed worldwide – 3G. Apart from providing wireless voice telephony, phones had long started to become “smarter” in their feature set, ranging from “digital assistant” features to basic emailing and fax messaging services. Yet, it was the marriage between 3G and Smartphones that established the bedrock for mobile Internet services to become more accessible to the masses. The dropping hardware costs, followed by increasing computational and processing power, rich support for thirdparty applications and access to GPS navigation technology all in ones palm was inadvertently leading to the shaping of a new type of economy – an economy that could only be conceived as Smartphone adoption reached a critical mass – the Sharing economy.

I first ordered a Taxi using Uber whilst I was in Seattle attending a conference last year; the fact that I didn’t have to look up the number of a local taxi service provider to pre-book a taxi, wave my hands to get a ride, wait in any form of queue, and even better –go through the hassles of a cash or card transaction at the end of the ride –propelled Uber to the top of the list of services I would be using again. Another sharing platform which I’m currently considering using is AirBnB to rent out an apartment for the trip that I’m currently planning to India. A decade ago, I would have probably flinched at the proposition of living, and even more so, letting out my apartment to a complete stranger. The recession that started in 2008 gave a huge boost to the sharing economy and collaborative consumption in general. More and more services built on the peer-to-peer sharing business model began to emerge and thrive. The marketplace is now brimming with services that allow you to rent out your home, car, parking spaces, goods, professional skills and even tap into your general knowledge of day-to-day things to make money in your spare time. Such technological innovations have caused a big cultural shift making it more acceptable to share and rent services. The essence of ownership that was strongly felt at one time has now given way to utilitarian and access based consumption.

Sharing economy has seen a growing trend in “micro-entrepreneurialism”. Take AirBnB, the poster boy of the sharing economy, for example – a relationship that may have begun as a “need to pay bills”, especially during the hard hit days of recession, soon gave way to opportunism. It’s estimated that almost a third of AirBnB’s revenue in the urban US comes from users who have at least three listings on the platform, taking full advantage of the rental price difference in short-term and long-term renting. An avid traveller and a gastronome comes back to London to start his own micro-enterprise by becoming a Vayable Insider, offering tours themed around the rich food culture in London. A construction worker laid off during the recession started providing handyman-type services on TaskRabbit earning $5000 a month, deciding not to go back to full time employment when the economy had improved. A highly rated freelance copy-editor makes his entire living renting his services at a price he sees fit on TaskRabbit.

Nevertheless, the online sharing economy has seen its fair set of critics; the services in this space have catapulted into existence and thrived because of increasing youth unemployment and stagnating incomes. Regardless, it appears that this emerging online business model is here to stay, not because sharing is greener – environment and resource friendly – and good for community building, but purely for the cost savings, accessibility and convenience brought about by these services. Whilst government policies and regulations still lag behind technological innovations, it’s becoming harder for regulatory bodies to ignore this growing trend. Regulations in some part of the world may be working against these disruptive business models, some for good reasons – take the closedown of Uber in India for example, but all this attention only means that the business model is further iterating and so are the regulations to accommodate these innovations. AirBnB now provides “host” insurance for its suppliers and, Uber, a more thorough driver check in the wake of regulatory rulings. Even traditional car rental companies are embracing the online peer-to-peer marketplace; see Avis Group takeover of Zipcar. The sharing economy that has been made possible through the digital medium is lending itself to wider cooperation, pretty much in the same way as the open-source movement did many decades ago.

Good Strategy, Bad Strategy -The Apple and Yahoo! example

 

[Update]

In 2016, Yahoo! Inc. is in the news again so I thought it was an apt time to update this post.

Yahoo! Inc. continues to be in need of a coherent strategy. There is mounting pressure from investors and potential buyers to sell its core internet business. Its market share and revenue in core online business has continued to slip and several private equity firms and telecom companies, including Verizon and AT&T are eyeing to buy the business. In the wake of all this Merissa Mayer is now looking at a consolidation strategy – Yahoo is pulling back from Europe and Latin America to focus more closely on key geographies, including North America and the UK. Several legacy products are being curtailed. There are hopes that the company would return to growth in 2017. Although, amidst growing pressure from activist investors it would be interesting to see how things pan out for the company.

[Original Post]

As an early teen, my first ever email account was a Yahoo! Mail account. Yahoo! Messenger and Yahoo! Chat rooms were a trend in those late-1990s days of the dot-com bubble. Cyber cafes were springing up everywhere in the towns and cities of India, and your first stop was most likely to be the Yahoo! Homepage or the Yahoo! IM on a customary visit to one of these places. Those were the heydays of Yahoo! Fast forward ten years and the company has been hurt by social-network firm Facebook and lost ground to Google; the company sees the slowest growth in over a decade, but rejects Microsoft’s $45bn takeover offer.

Yahoo! Inc. has often struggled with its identity and its position as either a Media or a Products company. During the past decade Yahoo! has seen a string of CEOs and Interim-CEOs. For a fleeting moment, it seemed that the company had gained some clarity in its alignment when Levinsohn, the interim-CEO and Mayer’s predecessor, proposed to position Yahoo! as “the world’s premier digital media company”. This vision was short-lived; soon Mayer was appointed the CEO and it was clear that Yahoo! Inc. was to be positioned as a Technology company.

Today Yahoo! Inc. is valued at $33bn, but if you were to deduct Yahoo’s approximate stake of $37bn in Alibaba, the company’s core business is not worth much at all. Let’s say that one of the tech industry’s Big Four were to acquire Yahoo!, it could typically sell off Yahoo’s Asian assets, Alibaba and Yahoo Japan, and absorb Yahoo’s core consumer web products and content sites free. So, can the floundering Internet Company turn itself around? The web is littered with articles citing how Yahoo! has spread itself too thin, and is trying to be everything, from search provider to messaging service provider down to providing finance, weather, advertisement, food and travel updates. What Yahoo needs is focus; with nearly 40 start-ups being gulped up by Yahoo in the last 2 years, including the notable $1.1bn Tumblr acquisition, the current trend suggests that this is exactly the opposite of what is currently happening. Through block acquisitions, Yahoo! is aiming to replace its old technologies and replenish talent. With Meyer at the helm, Yahoo! is looking at revamping its search engine and gain at least 20% of the search market. Yahoo! is bolstering its engineering efforts in the mobile space as well, and aims to compete head-on with the Big Four in this sector. With a flurry of activities going on in all directions, Yahoo! is surely living up to its reputation of a brand that hosts a bunch of products under its umbrella, but having no cohesive identity whatsoever. (Yahoo aims to be the leading mobile service provider in internet services consumed as part of people’s daily habits).

In contrast, Apple’s revival strategy was the complete opposite. In 1997, when Apple Computer, Inc. was on the verge of bankruptcy, Steve Jobs was tasked with bringing the company back to its feet. The $150mn investment from Microsoft gave Apple a new lease of life, but this had to be complemented with good strategy. Jobs began by consolidating the company into a self-sustaining core; he narrowed down the product lines to a handful and halted the 10-year long running futuristic project Newton, a PDA platform. Jobs went on to kill the Mac Clone Program, which had been introduced earlier in the hope of increasing Macintosh market penetration; the program was eating into Apple’s own high-end market. Only one vendor, UMAX, was allowed to market MacOS in the low-end computing space, but its licensing rights soon expired, leaving Apple in full control of the distribution and sale of its Operating System. In order to further cut costs, Apple decided to sell its computers directly using the build-to-order manufacturing process, thus marking the beginning of the Apple Store. Finally, after having cut 70% of the products and with only four product lines on sale for both professional and casual end-users, Jobs decided to do something unthought-of of by most Strategist of that time – instead of competing head-on with Microsoft for the mass PC-market he decided to wait for the next big thing. What was ushered in, as a result, was the iPod, iPhone and iPad phenomena. Apple Computer Inc. was renamed to Apple Inc. to emphasize this shift away from the PC market.

For every Apple and IBM that was able to turn itself around, there are thousands that have withered. This does not mean that Yahoo! will necessarily meet the same fate. It also doesn’t mean that the same strategy that worked for Apple would work for Yahoo! However, it goes without saying that Yahoo! needs a better plan than merely supercharging its acquisitions and development efforts.  It needs a coherent policy that directly tackles the challenges it faces; just as the “Think Different” slogan guided Apple Inc. to innovate and evolve itself into a world leader in the consumer electronics space, Yahoo! needs a purpose that can hold together its diverse and unrelated activities. The next few years are a crucial period for Yahoo! Inc. and the entire Tech Industry will be watching the company with much anticipation.

Note:

Aiming to be a portal for end-users is a lucrative proposition for many Tech companies. Yahoo’s strategy is based on the same principal belief as many other players in the industry – maintaining your own proprietary database that can be tapped to mint cash through ad-revenues.

Sources:
http://www.apple-history.com/h7
http://goodbadstrategy.com/
http://www.ft.com/topics/organisations/Yahoo!_Inc
 http://goo.gl/Xsykp6