07.12.2018 Views

WWRR Vol.2.015

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

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!