4 ms·

JD and TMall have about close to 1,000 distribution points in the major cities with at least 10,000 delivery people each. Same day delivery is standard (order b

JD and TMall have about close to 1,000 distribution points in the major cities with at least 10,000 delivery people each. Same day delivery is standard (order before 10am and it arrives by 6pm) for a lot of products. Install and building furniture at your home is also a common feature. Two day delivery is slow. Amazon isn't willing to invest the money and for most products on their site they still don't stock products locally. Half the time I find products on their site I have to wait 2/3+ weeks for it to be imported. There is nothing stopping them having local stock but ... they don't.

PakG1 7y ago
I don't think it's logical for them to have local stock. That would require a HUGE capital investment to build up infrastructure and distribution points to go head to head with the locals. I bet Amazon's CFO looks at that and then tells Bezos, "Hey, these numbers are completely irrational, let's spend the money elsewhere where we'll have a better return on investment, please."
- HatchedLake721 7y ago
  It’s been logical to do it in a domestic market to become a market leader but it’s illogical to do it in a new market?
  - jlarocco 7y ago
    I think there's something to the OP's point. Amazon's infrastructure roll out paid off in the United States because there was little competition. They rushed out infrastructure and cornered the online shopping and delivery market. Walmart and the other big stores had an entirely different business model and their warehouses and infrastructure took time to adjust and catch up, with Amazon still in the lead. In China, the local competitors already have a significant head start on their infrastructure, and Amazon would be playing catch up in a relatively unfriendly market. It could take them forever to recoup the investment, if they ever did. Unfortunately, they can't compete without that infrastructure in place, so what else can they do but leave?
- product50 7y ago
  Yeah - and Jeff seems to be the type of guy who is like, you are right CFO. We are here for the short term - let us do what you are saying?! China is the biggest eComm market in the world! If there was an opportunity for Amazon to penetrate (regulations being the biggest challenge), Amazon would have totally gone for it. This is a company why, 5 yrs back, committed $5B to India when eComm there was/still is totally burgeoning.
  - adinobro 7y ago
    This was already standard in China at least 7 years ago.
  - hopler 7y ago
    5 yrs ago was 7 yrs after Flipkart cloned Amazon in India by former Amazon employees.
    - product50 7y ago
      And 5yrs ago was 2yrs after Amazon launched in India. Anyways, Amazon is dominating eComm in India and it seems like the early lead which Flipkart had didn't count for much.
- tracker1 7y ago
  Amazon is used to building out localized infrastructure AFTER demand has been proven. In China, local competition already exists and that's why they are getting their asses handed to them. It also seems like Amazon.cn isn't given the leeway they should have been given for local execs to make those kinds of calls. They (Amazon) do a lot right, but that doesn't mean their approach is always right.

PakG1 7y ago

I don't think it's logical for them to have local stock. That would require a HUGE capital investment to build up infrastructure and distribution points to go head to head with the locals. I bet Amazon's CFO looks at that and then tells Bezos, "Hey, these numbers are completely irrational, let's spend the money elsewhere where we'll have a better return on investment, please."

HatchedLake721 7y ago
It’s been logical to do it in a domestic market to become a market leader but it’s illogical to do it in a new market?
- jlarocco 7y ago
  I think there's something to the OP's point. Amazon's infrastructure roll out paid off in the United States because there was little competition. They rushed out infrastructure and cornered the online shopping and delivery market. Walmart and the other big stores had an entirely different business model and their warehouses and infrastructure took time to adjust and catch up, with Amazon still in the lead. In China, the local competitors already have a significant head start on their infrastructure, and Amazon would be playing catch up in a relatively unfriendly market. It could take them forever to recoup the investment, if they ever did. Unfortunately, they can't compete without that infrastructure in place, so what else can they do but leave?
product50 7y ago
Yeah - and Jeff seems to be the type of guy who is like, you are right CFO. We are here for the short term - let us do what you are saying?! China is the biggest eComm market in the world! If there was an opportunity for Amazon to penetrate (regulations being the biggest challenge), Amazon would have totally gone for it. This is a company why, 5 yrs back, committed $5B to India when eComm there was/still is totally burgeoning.
- adinobro 7y ago
  This was already standard in China at least 7 years ago.
- hopler 7y ago
  5 yrs ago was 7 yrs after Flipkart cloned Amazon in India by former Amazon employees.
  - product50 7y ago
    And 5yrs ago was 2yrs after Amazon launched in India. Anyways, Amazon is dominating eComm in India and it seems like the early lead which Flipkart had didn't count for much.
tracker1 7y ago
Amazon is used to building out localized infrastructure AFTER demand has been proven. In China, local competition already exists and that's why they are getting their asses handed to them. It also seems like Amazon.cn isn't given the leeway they should have been given for local execs to make those kinds of calls. They (Amazon) do a lot right, but that doesn't mean their approach is always right.