You are on page 1of 10

Admart : What went

wrong ?

Presented By Group 12
Avik Roy PGP/12/12
Vipul Vinod Jain
Nikhil Upadhyay
Early Days
◦ Business of online retail shopping
◦ Launched in June 1999
◦ Direct Marketing company
Sold Groceries
Electronic Goods
◦ Challenged retail duopoly
Welcome Supermarket ( Leader)
Park’N Shop
Aimed at online retail customers
Order placed through telephone,
fax and email
Excellent Marketing Strategy
◦ Promotion in Apple Daily
Problems :
◦ 25% internet based
◦ 65% telephone
◦ 10% fax
Internet Market Size
As of June1999 potential
customer 340,000 ( 17% of 2
Products in demand
◦ Books , CDs, Audio and Videotapes
◦ Grocery
Demand for grocery rising to 800
Average purchase value 680$.
Major Deterrent
Consumer need to feel and touch
Haggle over prices
Fear of online fraud
Delivery problems
Lost goods
Misrepresentation of goods
Porters 5 force Model
1. High rental and infrastructure
costs in Hong Kong
1. Cut throat price competition
2. Increased expenditure on sales, 2. Two supermarket giants could
advertising and promotions quickly replicate new idea and
3. Aggressive expansion outdo the company which
introduces it
• Wellcome’s plan to open 20
new stores ◦ Carrefour
• Exit of players like Carrefour Big two had a firm grip over the
and Guangnan market
• Small retail business dropped
by 20%
1. Cost based leadership,
differentiation reduced to
minimum; Customers
1. Resale price maintenance attracted to store with lower
(RPM) system in place costs
• Refusal to sell to retailers 2. No switching costs involved
who undercut prices–Yakult in switching from one
International vs. Park’Nshop vendor to another
• 70% stake captured by big 3. Service quality a prime
two; Local wholesaler concern for buyers
complete refusal to deal with
• Manipulation of suppliers
leading to exit of Carrefour

1. No substitute products available

Competitive Advantage
Financial Data
 Start
◦ Sales monthly :- 45.5 mn$
◦ Expenses :- 50.7mn$
◦ Average Order Size :- 3791.6$
◦ Number of order :- 12000
 Cease
◦ Sales monthly :- 18 mn$
◦ Average Order Size :- 700$
◦ Number of order :- 25,714
◦ Losses :- 100 mn $
( June 99-200) 62.4mn + 19.5mn+16.3mn
 Eventhough orders increased, size of
orders plummeted
◦ To remove duopoly of the major players
◦ Capture market share through internet
Company failed to align core
competency with logistics & operational
Back up your plans with a sound public
relations campaign – contingency
Diversify your risk – do not put all your
eggs in one basket! – case of Apple
Imitating competition may not work –
case of reducing minimum order size
Thank You