Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
M<br />
FOUNDATION<br />
...which increases the risk of margin compression from store cannibalization:<br />
Morgan Stanley's U.S. Hardline/Broadlines analyst<br />
Simeon Gutman, in his latest report, has observed 50bps of EBIT<br />
margin compression for his coverage for every 1 percentage point<br />
increase in online penetration. Simeon notes that often, online sales<br />
merely come at the expense of in-store sales, and are therefore not<br />
additive to overall growth.<br />
This dynamic causes in-store store expense deleverage because<br />
retailers must maintain store-level investments in wages, rent, utilities,<br />
etc. At the same time, because retailers generally lack scale in<br />
their eCommerce businesses, deleverage in the eCommerce channel<br />
can also occur.<br />
Net, the team estimates that gross margins on delivery are ~1,000<br />
bps below in-store margins.<br />
Based on our calculations, for India, grocery operating margins for<br />
players offering online fulfillment will be materially lower<br />
(3.6%-4.3%) vs. the physical retail model (~5%). The margin hit will<br />
be contingent on the extent of cannibalization of in-store sales as<br />
well as the extent of fulfillment cost borne by the consumer. In our<br />
calculations, we assume in-store gross margins of ~16% (based on<br />
our discussion with the industry) and use a standardized shopping<br />
basket of Rs1,000 along with relatively conservative assessment of<br />
pick, pack, and delivery costs.<br />
Exhibit 9:<br />
Scenario analysis: In-store vs. omni-channel offering delivery<br />
Scenario 1 (S1) - only in-store sales Scenario 2 (S2) - free delivery Scenario 3 (S3) - charged Rs35/order<br />
In-store Instore Delivery Total Instore Delivery Total<br />
Revenues (Rs) 1,500,000 1,200,000 150,000 1,350,000 1,200,000 300,000 1,500,000<br />
Orders per day 1,500 1,200 300 1,500 1,200 300 1,500<br />
x A.O.V (Rs) 1,000 1,000 500 1,000 1,000<br />
Gross profit (@ 16%) 240,000 192,000 24,000 216,000 192,000 48,000 240,000<br />
Total overheads 165,000 165,000 20,983 185,983 165,000 10,483 175,483<br />
as % of sales 11% 14% 14% 14%<br />
- Pick and pack 4,945 4,945<br />
- Fulfillment costs 16,038 5,538<br />
- Others 165,000 165,000 165,000<br />
EBITDA 75,000 27,000 3,017 30,017 27,000 37,517 64,517<br />
EBITDA margins 5.0% 2.3% 2.0% 2.2% 2.3% 12.5% 4.3%<br />
In-store sales<br />
cannibalized by<br />
delivery orders<br />
Assumed basket size of<br />
Rs1,000<br />
Customer bears a partial<br />
cost of fulfillment in S3 vs<br />
free delivery in S2<br />
Store Cannibalization<br />
drives an EBIDTA margin<br />
compression in S2 & S3<br />
Assumptions<br />
Pick and pack<br />
Monthly wages (Rs) 15,000<br />
Orders per day 30-35<br />
Employees required 9<br />
Per delivery cost (Rs) 16<br />
Employee (Fulfillment)<br />
Monthly wages (Rs) 18,000<br />
Employees required 20<br />
Per delivery cost (Rs) 46<br />
Trucking and fuel (Fulfillment)<br />
Vehicle cost per day (Rs) 1,370 Assume 10 vehicles delivering 30 orders a day<br />
Fuel cost per day (Rs)<br />
822 Assume 40km travel per day<br />
Per delivery cost (Rs) 7<br />
Total cost (per order)<br />
Rs70<br />
Source: Morgan Stanley Research Note: A.O.V - Average order value<br />
14