Retail Industry O2O In The Internet Era

The impact of the electricity supplier on the physical retail industry is realistic, the passenger flow is becoming less and less, and business is becoming more and more difficult. This kind of pain has created sufficient conditions for the spread and domination of "Internet thinking" and evolved into "Internet thinking", which implies the only way out for retail industry, O2O. Suning, Wanda, Yintai and Wangfujing these Internet transformation cases are described as pioneers of breakout and learning example. The rise of millet is no longer a suspicion or vigilance to the "Internet thinking". This trend of coming in and coming in is based on survival, but it is likely to be a collective death.

For physical retailing, "thinking against the Internet" is more fundamental than "Internet thinking". The former guides enterprises to fully consider the characteristics of entity retailing and the possibility of innovation. "Internet thinking" has already excluded other ways. For physical retailing, O2O first brings double operating costs on line and offline, and retail prices have to be reduced to suit the online competitive environment. Using double cost to obtain lower profits, and can not win the price advantage relative to the pure electronic business, can only be the death. Eventually, it will become the bag of e-commerce giant, such as intime department store, which has been "surrendered" to Alibaba.

"Thinking against the Internet" means essentially thinking - what is the character of physical retailing and what it can be, that is, reconstructing the value system and core competitiveness of physical retail, and this characteristic is helpless to the electricity supplier, and it can coexist with one another, and even bring pressure to the electricity supplier. Based on this strategy, it is the right way to innovate the business mode to think about what Internet technology can do for this core competitiveness.

Is physical retailing impossible to innovate? Is O2O the only way? Has there been any innovation in clothing retailing? From distribution mode to terminal service mode, there has been no major innovation since the garment industry was formed. Is it impossible to innovate? The biggest obstacle to innovation is the three words "impossible".

The urgent need of the entity retailing industry is the systematic analysis of the core strengths of the electricity supplier. Yes, we need to find the enemy's core strengths, not our weaknesses. Is the price advantage of electricity providers the key? The key advantage of the electricity supplier lies in the collection of goods which are not restricted by geography, that is, the quantity of commodities is nearly "infinite". The key advantage lies in the quantity of commodities, not the price of commodities, or the price is the inevitable result of the electricity supplier, rather than the real reason for the rapid rise of online shopping. Why do you say that?

A clothing store can attract customers through various price promotions, even with the same price on line. It can also improve the convenience of shopping by expanding online platform and distribution service, but a clothing store can not create the same option. A clothing brand is even more impossible. Its quantity of goods can not match the electricity supplier. The electricity supplier wins the market advantage. First of all, it is not because it is lower in price, but because of its selectivity.

　　 Online retailers The reason why it prevails is not that it has some shortcomings. This is very simple. No one wins the market because of its shortcomings, but because it establishes the unique advantage that the real business can not get - the "infinite" option. However, any particular advantage conceals its unique weakness. The "infinite" commodity means unlimited choice and a large amount of information overlap. This is the "choice problem" prevalent in the consumer society. Therefore, "more" does not mean that it can not be shaken.

Making the best choice for consumers and giving consumers more choices are two different strategies. Germany's ADI supermarket has defeated WAL-MART and forced WAL-MART to retreat from Germany. It is through "less better" to challenge "more". At the same time, the "less better" of ADI supermarket has also brought the "lower" price advantage. Although they all belong to physical retailing, the most important thing is the inherent logic of the strategy itself.

Think of those standing on the WAL-MART shelves, swaying to the large number of selectable items. Consumer Think about those consumers who are facing the electricity supplier search engine and clicking on the next page. They will understand what is "choice problem". This is the poor consumption experience hidden behind the convenience of online shopping.

The consumer database of electronic commerce can recommend the same type of goods according to the history of consumption, but it can not recommend a truly suitable commodity. If you buy a fashion in a wardrobe or browse a product web page, its recommendation system will insist on recommending the same type of merchandise to you. What electricity providers can do now is to recommend commodities, not help them. However, in the retail terminal, the practice is still the traditional and industrial society's recommendation logic, not the logic of consumer service, not how to make the best choice for consumers and make consumers choose the right logic.

　　 Physical retailing Focusing on experience is the experience that enables consumers to make the right and efficient choice. However, a clothing mall only understands experience as a good shopping environment, and understands that it is not only the core of fashion and clothing consumption experience.

Overall, the retail thinking in the industrial age has not evolved and has not adapted to the changes in the consumption era. Perhaps the whole industry will awaken and truly evolve until the O2O strategy hits the wall, so that we can have a correct understanding of "Internet thinking". It may be too late and cost too much.