GRAB

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
#61
(07-03-2022, 01:06 AM)Big Toe Wrote: A few things we can all agree on. While the combined market of SEA region is attractive, the incentives and the win at all cost mentality is making losers out of all the story-tellers. Actually this mindset is not unique to these disrupters, it happens in many industries and amongst countries as well. Of course this imbalance wont go on perpetually, at some point they will either merge or exit.

And the super-app story where one can get everything in one app is probably the best story of them all. Again, while the envisioned end game might sound extremely attractive, the reality of it happening is exceedingly low. (This is somewhat akin to someone hoping to win a $12M toto and talking about what happens after winning.) Some business are inherently very unattractive to begin with. Having it all is really quite pointless. Forcing it to happen will bring no happiness, especially for investors.

Again, I do not have deep insights into these companies as they do not fall in the what I am able to confidently value. Thus I know only enough to avoid. I speak from a normal business perspective.

Hi BigToe,

Since we are weaving stories, how about thinking like a VC?
Investing like a PE (which is what we are doing) is about what is probable. Investing like a VC is about what is possible.

How about buying a call option in all the stocks that can become a super app of SEA? Size it correctly for a 5-10x return. As per CY09, so far, we have Go-To, Grab and SEA. I don't think any VCs are brave enough to fund a new one from ground up, and so it is pretty reasonable to narrow down to the 3 of them

How does the toe tinks?
Reply
#62
What is superapp and does it worth a lot? My mobile phone is my superapp. Google is another since I use it like crazy. The rest.. well. The idea of being THE SUPERAPP is sexy but most if not all apps will not make it. Maybe Wechat is a supperapp in China but is not once it climb out of the great China Wall. So is it easy for all these apps to be the superapps of SEA with all the countries and their cultures ?

Why only Go-to, grab and sea? Who would have thought about them 10 years back. Innovation and competition doesn't stop once some co. Got bigger and has some market shares or an app. Even with existing competitions, I don't see these 3 as clear winners for many industries or areas they are competing.

I don't know them well but base on what I know, I rate them rather low in term of competitive advantage they enjoy.
Reply
#63
@Donmihaihai Great point. Thank you. Superapp as a concept is overhyped.

Posted this before in the Tencent thread, but timely:


Being a SuperApp in and of itself, isn't a moat, unless you can do 1 or several of the services on it superbly. Wechat for example, does chat and payments really well, AND profitably.

Can't say the same for Grab.
“If you buy a business just because it’s undervalued, then you have to worry about selling it when it reaches its intrinsic value. That’s hard. But if you can buy a few great companies, then you can sit on your ass. That’s a good thing.” - Charlie Munger
Reply
#64
The video is entertaining or I would say humorous. Thanks Wildreamz

To Donmihaihai point: He might be right. If you use Grab or shopee app, one would notice in the first page, it is icons at the top requires you to click and lead you to various services it offers. Essentially the front page of the "superapp wanna be" is like the homepage of android or apple phones- littered with app icons for things you want to do.

Google and Apple are doing the same with their own payment services app now (which replaces the need of paypal/krispay/grabpay/shopeepay etc). Its merely outsourcing its "e commerce app" by letting you install Amazon. Their IOS is essentially a super app but the less lucrative businesses, they let other app providers do it. Thats why they control the browser and now payment services
Reply
#65
1. I would think interpreting Grab's strategy to be a 'superapp' -- or an app that is able to do just about everything -- is probably not accurate. At least at present, there are no signs that it aims to be a social media network, or an entertainment provider.

2. Tencent, and its Wechat, grew to be the largest social media and entertainment provider in China because it has always pursued a strategy to cross-sell as many related products as possible to its users, with the aim of keeping them within Tencent's walled garden. In the early days of QQ, it was not just an ICQ messaging system, but it also had email, allowed users to play games with each other, and also watch videos.

In US, Yahoo and America Online were also trying to build their walled garden, but as we now know they failed. So an interesting question is why Tencent succeeded doing so in China, but not their counterparts in US. Note that Tencent in its early days wasn't as innovative as it is known to be now; QQ was a complete knock off of ICQ, and so were most of China's early internet products.

So now there are a few players in SE Asia trying to also build their own walled garden. The difference being that Tencent managed to turn profitable in its early days while these players in SE Asia are still bleeding. And they do so because the prize to be the Alibaba, Tencent, Meituan, Ant -- or some smaller form of it -- in SE Asia is huge. Though I'm not sure if any of the existing players are a safe bet.
Reply
#66
More woes ?

didn't know Business Wire is a Berkshire Hathaway company....

------------------

GRAB INVESTIGATION ALERT: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Announces Investigation into Grab Holdings Limited f/k/a Altimeter Growth Corp. and Encourages Investors with Substantial Losses or Witnesses with Relevant Information to Contact the Firm
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/2...t-the-Firm
Reply
#67
(07-03-2022, 09:28 PM)karlmarx Wrote: ..
In US, Yahoo and America Online were also trying to build their walled garden, but as we now know they failed. So an interesting question is why Tencent succeeded doing so in China, but not their counterparts in US.
..

Are you forgetting US counterparts like Amazon, Google and Facebook? Smile

It's not about countries of origin (if that was ever a factor of consideration), it's about who has a faster pace of innovation.

I think Tencent is clearly much more innovative than ICQ/AOL from the start as evidenced from QQ's early, highly profitable freemium model and monetization strategies (https://english.ckgsb.edu.cn/knowledges/...-freemium/), and rapid expansion to other adjacent product categories.

ICQ/AOL has never showed similar track-record of competence in product innovation. Google, for example, has (Search>Email>Browser>Video streaming etc.).

Have we seen similar track-record of fast-paced product innovation by Grab? When was the last innovative and profitable product launch?
“If you buy a business just because it’s undervalued, then you have to worry about selling it when it reaches its intrinsic value. That’s hard. But if you can buy a few great companies, then you can sit on your ass. That’s a good thing.” - Charlie Munger
Reply
#68
(06-03-2022, 04:34 PM)CY09 Wrote: Meituan is profitable in the food delivery. Meituan reported a 4.3% net margin and the latest first half (pre common prosperity law days), Meituan has grown it to 10% margin, see page 17

DeliveryHero has also reported positive EBITDA for its Middle East North Africa and Europe segments

http://media-meituan.todayir.com/2021092...536_en.pdf

I do not know the similarity among China, Europe, Middle East and North Africa; but my suspicion is that these companies have been carefully managing their cost by not over paying freelancers too much, decent commission and not much incentives.

The situation is very unique in South East Asia where all the companies are dangling huge incentives and overpaying delivery riders in their bid to be number 1

I am skeptical about the long-term business viability of delivery platforms. 

My skepticism stems from: 

- a Ninja Van vehicle driver when he drives into a condominium or HDB block, he can delivers many products to many households. There is some efficiency in physics and economics. 

- but how many meals can a Grab rider deliver in a condominium or HDB block for each trip given that customers don like to wait for food? There is no efficiency in physics and economics. For the time and distance spent on delivering only one meal, The Grab rider will need a higher fee per meal than the fee per package for the Ninja Van driver.

But I hope I can be convinced otherwise. Because Local Consumer Services of Alibaba (which includes Ele) is the largest loss business segment of Alibaba. If Local Consumer Services can turn profitable, the boost to Ali's profitability from a loss to a positive 10% margin would be significant.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)