Brandon Donnelly

Daily insights for city builders, delivered every morning at 6 AM ET. I’m Brandon Donnelly — a Toronto-based real estate developer and founder of Globizen. I’ve been writing here since 2013.

Subscribe

Tag: amazon

  • Essential food logistics

    Blair Welch, co-founding partner of Slate Asset Management, was recently interviewed by Don Wilcox of RENX about the company’s recent acquisition of the Commercial Real Estate Business of New York-based Annaly Capital Management. As part of the deal, we also acquired $0.4 billion of grocery-anchored real estate assets across the US. These were purchased by Slate Grocery REIT (TSX: SGR.UN). What some of you maybe don’t know, though, is how we as a company view these kinds of assets as being essential food infrastructure, more so than as being retail assets. So here are a few excerpts from the article and quotes from Blair that explain why, in our view, this distinction matters.

    “We started buying grocery-anchored real estate in a big way in the financial crisis and I think we always looked at grocery-anchored real estate as food logistics, rather than a retail play,” Welch explained. “In the pandemic it’s really proven the local food store, or the spoke in the hub, is just as valuable as the hub itself.”

    Despite an increase in online grocery shopping (to about 10 per cent in the U.S.), people are still going to the stores. Or, at least, (are) getting their products from the local stores. Again, think “food logistics.”

    “That (10 per cent bought online) means 90 per cent is done in store,” Welch observed. “Now, here’s the interesting thing. Over 90 per cent – probably closer to 95 per cent – of the online sales are done at the local store.

    “So what we are saying is over 99 per cent of all the sales are done at the local stores, whether it is click and collect, or someone delivers. You are not changing the distribution pattern.”

    Here are a few more words and a comparison to what Amazon is and has been doing when it comes to food logistics:

    “If I’m Kroger or Walmart if I have to pay $10 (per square foot) for my warehouse what’s the difference if I’m paying $10 for my store? It’s the same cost, they just look at it as a distribution cost,” he said.

    However, those stores are in the middle of most neighbourhoods. Exactly where Amazon wants to be.

    “I think Amazon is an amazing company. I think their acquisition of Whole Foods and others is actually to get closer to the consumer. And the Whole Foods (acquisition) was just under 400 grocery stores in a market of 35,000 stores.

    “If I am Walmart with 5,000 stores or Kroger with about the same under different banners, that infrastructure is extremely valuable.”

    Slate will soon own more of it.

    For the full article, click here.

  • Returning to an office-centric culture

    Earlier this week, Amazon announced that it plans to return to an “office-centric culture” as its baseline. Its rationale was that being in an office allows the company to better “invent, collaborate, and learn together.” All of this was laid out in an announcement that was distributed to its teams globally. On the other end of the spectrum, Twitter continues to double down on working from home. The company, which is currently hiring, is even trying to target talent that may be disgruntled by the fact that their current company is planning for them to return to the office. Two very different approaches. So which one is right?

    This is, of course, a great debate right now and the right answer probably depends on a myriad of different factors, some of which are likely specific to the company. Dror Poleg has been trying to think through this problem with something he calls the talent equation (because it’s all about talent). It works like this: level of in-person interaction x overall size of talent pool = innovation and financial success. The basis behind this equation is pretty simple. In-person interaction is great for business. This much we know. But you also need the right talent interacting. Allowing remote work is one way of expanding the size of your talent pool. But again, you do this at the expense of in-person interaction.

    In-person interaction is what makes cities the great organisms that they are. And I believe firmly in this side of the equation over the long-term. Even right now I find that when I go into the office, my call and Zoom volumes go down dramatically and I have more time to think, collaborate, and do, you know, actual work. This is because many interactions don’t require a Zoom meeting when you’re in the office. You stop by someone’s desk. You ask a thing (usually pretty quickly). And then you go off and action that thing. But I also acknowledge that for some companies, access to the right talent — and lots of it — may be a real challenge, particularly in smaller cities.

    Like Amazon, I am a supporter of office-centric work cultures. But I do think that Poleg’s talent equation is a useful way to think about this debate right now.

    Photo by Shridhar Gupta on Unsplash

  • Are Amazon’s private labels any different?

    Amazon is sometimes criticized for its private labels. The way this generally works is that Amazon uses the data that it collects from its platform to see what customers are buying. It then goes out and makes its own version of these products and sells them in competition with the other products in its marketplace. The reason why Amazon (and others) do this is because the margins are generally better on private labels, even though they are often positioned to the end customer as being a value-oriented alternative. That is, they’re cheaper.

    Some people think that Amazon shouldn’t be doing this, particularly as its third party marketplace continues to grow. This side of its marketplace deals with inventory that Amazon doesn’t own. It is the stuff of third party sellers who come to the platform to access Amazon’s customer base and reach, and to possibly use its fulfillment services. This marketplace now makes up about 60% of Amazon’s sales volume and so it has become a dominant part of its business. It’s a way to grow without having to spend money on additional inventory.

    Is it, then, acceptable for Amazon to mine this data, replicate products, and compete with its own customers? The truth is that this isn’t all that new. As Benedict Evans points out in this recent post, retailers have been doing this for more than a century. The above table taken from a 1932 report on “chain store private brands” shows that about 80% of stores in the US at this time were selling private label brands. Furthermore, it represented about a quarter of their overall sales. Is this time any different?

    Table via Benedict Evans

  • We’re all going back to offices — most of us anyway

    I was speaking with a writer from the Globe & Mail today about the future of office. We were half talking about a new AAA strata office building — called Capital Point — that we (Slate) are in the midst of launching in the Metrotown neighborhood of Burnaby, BC. And we were half talking about whether or not we’re all going to return to offices.

    This is one of the great debates of the pandemic but, as I mentioned in my 2021 predictions post, I think it’s overblown. The longer I work from home and spend my entire day on video calls (only to start actual work in the evening), the more I become convinced that this is a suboptimal arrangement for productivity, collaboration, personal motivation, employee morale, and talent retention (among many other things).

    We have complete conviction around great offices in the right locations. That’s why Amazon and whoever else continue to build. They’re rightly looking past this period of dislocation (12-24 months of suck). Again, this is not to say that there won’t be some changes and that certain pre-existing trends haven’t been accelerated, because they have been. But I believe that humans will continue to cluster for work.

    In fact, it’s hard to disentangle cities and offices. Cities are labor markets. It’s where agglomeration economies take hold and where people come to improve their socioeconomic standing in the world (as well as meet people and have fun). To say that we no longer need to come together in person for work is to say, in a way, that we no longer need cities. We can all decentralize.

    That is not a bet that I am prepared to make.

    For more information about Capital Point and to register for the project, click here.

  • The great unbundling

    Every year, Benedict Evans publishes a presentation about the “big macro tech trends” impacting the global economy. They are always excellent and I usually share them here on the blog. It’s also becoming harder and harder to differentiate tech trends from the rest of the economy, and so in many ways this is just a presentation about important macro trends.

    In this year’s presentation, he focuses on the “unbundling” of retail, ecommerce, advertising and TV; China and the end of the American internet; and a few other timely topics. To view the presentation, click here. Benedict also delivered this same presentation at a recent event by Protocol and Nasdaq (video link) in case you’d prefer to consume the content that way.

  • Thinking long-term and telling the right story

    With the recent announcement that Jeff Bezos will be stepping down as CEO of Amazon later this year, there have been countless articles about the legacy that he will be leaving behind, as well as about the next act that is expected to follow. A big part of this legacy is centered around innovation.

    Do any of you remember Amazon’s Fire Phone? Perhaps not. It was a complete failure. But that doesn’t matter because most people only remember the successes — everything from Amazon Prime to AWS, the latter of which was heavily doubted at the time. Isn’t this a distraction from the core business of selling books?

    This recent FT article by Dave Lee also makes a good point about another one of Amazon’s innovations: thinking long-term and getting the market to buy in to that approach.

    But another Bezos innovation has been his relationship with Wall Street, a world he was intimately familiar with, having previously worked at investment firm DE Shaw.

    Starting with his first letter to shareholders in 1997, Bezos consistently warned investors that profits would forever be secondary to growth, in what would become a recurring theme throughout Amazon’s history as it expanded its distribution network from seven dedicated facilities in 1999, to more than 1,500 today.

    “Bezos has an unparalleled ability to peddle his vision to Wall Street,” says Stacy Mitchell, from the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, who advocates breaking Amazon into smaller pieces.

    “He was given this incredibly long leash, selling books at a loss. Independent bookstores could have multiplied across the country with that business model. But of course, they weren’t allowed to lose money.”

    It reminds me of a blog post that Fred Wilson penned at the end of last year, where he argued that speculative frenzies tend to be off in their magnitude, but directionally correct.

    The point he was making was that who knows what the market cap of a company like Tesla should be. With its current market cap, it has been able to raise a lot of money without much dilution and that is going to accelerate our shift toward electric vehicles — a good thing and the right path forward.

    Of course, if you’re an independent bookstore owner, you may not look at Amazon’s approach as being all that innovative. In fact, you may have another word in mind.

    But if you look at the parcel room in any condo or apartment building (as I do all the time), it’s pretty clear to me that the majority of ecommerce transactions are happening on Amazon. A machine has been built that seemingly renders people what they want, how they want it.

  • Amazon opens up its maps platform

    More than half of Amazon’s US deliveries are now completed using its own fleet. So at some point, the company will no longer need to rely on FedEx and/or UPS. It’s also on track to quickly surpass them in terms of packages delivered per year, if it hasn’t already.

    But this also means that Amazon has had (and has been developing) its own maps platform to help support its delivery vehicles. Up until recently it was an entirely internal and proprietary tool. But this month, the company started to open it up in preview form (via an API).

    What this mean is that if you have a web or mobile application that needs a map or some other kind of location-based feature, you now have the option of using Amazon instead of Google or Apple or some other company.

    What’s interesting about this move is that it’s exactly what Amazon did with AWS (its dominant cloud infrastructure business). AWS is a meaningful part of Amazon’s overall business — in fact, it’s responsible for over 10% of the company’s total revenue, and an even bigger part of its operating income.

    So this quiet little announcement could be something.

  • Amazon’s delivery network is now the 4th largest in the US

    This is an interesting article about Amazon’s delivery network, which is now the 4th largest in the United States. Here are the numbers (most of which are as of 2019):

    • Since 2014, Amazon has spent $39 billion building out its delivery network. When you add in warehouses and airplanes, this number increases to about $60 billion. As of 2019, Amazon leased 97% of its fulfillment and data center spaces.
    • Amazon is becoming increasingly vertically integrated. Last year, Amazon delivered about 58% of the 4.5 billion parcels that it shipped to US consumers. This represents about 22% of all online retail deliveries.
    • Outside of the US, Amazon still handles close to 50% of its own order deliveries. By 2025, Bank of America Global Research is predicting that Amazon could grow to handle somewhere between 38% and 49% of all online order deliveries in the US.
    • Amazon is the 4th largest in terms of US package deliveries (2019), behind FedEx, UPS, and USPS (in that order).
    • Amazon’s fulfillment network roughly entails: receiving centers -> fulfillment centers -> sortation centers -> last-mile delivery stations. It’s a hub and spoke system with the physical real estate naturally getting smaller as you get closer to the end destination. For a lot more information on their network, click here.

  • Amazon might be buying Zoox

    This week the FT reported that Amazon is in “advanced talks” to acquire the self-driving startup Zoox. This would be Amazon’s first acquisition in the space, though it did lead a $530M funding round in Aurora in early 2019.

    Zoox last raised two years ago and was valued at $3.2 billion. Rumor has it that its valuation will be less than that today. Some of its investors, according to FT, include Breyer Capital and the Canadian Pension Plan Investment Board.

    The move seems reasonable. Amazon wants to build out its (driverless) logistics capabilities. It’s also in keeping with what we have been seeing from big tech. Companies that can are using this environment to be acquisitive, invest in the future and, hopefully, gain market share. It’s probably also inevitable that the self-driving space will see some consolidation going forward.

    If you go back to this post from earlier this year, Zoox and Aurora weren’t near the top in terms of R&D spending on autonomy. And it has become increasingly clear that this a giant problem/opportunity requiring giant funding capabilities. It’s going to take time.

    I recently heard Chamath Palihapitiya refer to Jeff Bezos as the greatest investor of our time — even more so than Warren Buffet. Why? Because he is consistently, and sometimes exclusively, investing in the future. Is this one of those moments?

  • Deal is back on: Amazon to buy stake in Deliveroo

    This is an interesting business story. Deliveroo is a London-based online food delivery company that was founded back in 2013 and today accounts for a big chunk of the online restaurant platform market in the UK. (They are also developing a network of “ghost kitchens” through a subsidiary called Deliveroo Editions.)

    Amazon has been and still is interested in buying a minority stake in the company (Roofoods Ltd). But the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has been blocking it out of fear that it would stifle competition. The thinking was that if they blocked this deal, maybe, just maybe, Amazon would enter the market on its own. And more participants means more competition.

    The merger case was opened on July 5, 2019.

    Well, Deliveroo’s business is now struggling amid this pandemic. To deliver food from restaurants and then charge those restaurants a commission, it turns out that you typically need those restaurants to be open for business. So the CMA is now revisiting the case. Is it better to have Amazon invest in Deliveroo or have Deliveroo possibly fail?

    The CMA has decided that the former now makes more sense — at least provisionally.