Competitor Analysis In Ecommerce

Vietnam’s food delivery market just hit a massive $2.1$ billion dollars in GMV, growing at 19% year-on-year. While that makes it the second fastest-growing market in SEA, the market remains brutal. 🛵 In just 2 years, we’ve seen heavyweights like BAEMIN and Gojek pull out, alongside local player Loship. Today, a staggering 92% of the market is controlled by just two names: ShopeeFood and GrabFood. 🟠ShopeeFood has effectively "captured" the younger demographic. By leveraging the Shopee ecosystem, they’ve made bubble tea and low-value snacks a daily ritual. 🟢On the other side, GrabFood has moved "upmarket." They are the go-to for the high-income professional. Their focus is on full meals, group orders, and a smoother user interface. 📉The Loyalty Gap Despite the massive GMV, there is a growing tension in the air: Price Gap: Meals on apps are now significantly more expensive than eating on-site. The "Order Batching” Problem: Drivers often carry multiple orders at once to stay profitable. For the customer, this means watching your "cơm văn phòng" go on a city tour while it slowly turns cold. 🛵The New Challenger This is exactly where Xanh SM Ngon is trying to disrupt the duopoly. By using an all-electric fleet and a strict "no-batching" policy, they want to prove that speed and temperature are the new moats. Such intense competition in Food Delivery will only increase the pace of innovation. In such a hyper mobile society, blue prints for FMCG & new technologies are being developed that will have impact, far beyond Vietnam's borders. Source: Momentum Works, IPOS, NielsenIQ, Decision Lab, VnExpress, B-company, The Investor *While information from Asia Circles is publicly accessible and derived from third-party sources, its verification and validity are not guaranteed. #FoodTech #MarketInsights #ConsumerInsight #ShopeeFood #GrabFood

We're moving away from charging for *access* to software and toward charging for the *work delivered* by software & AI agents. Don't freak out: this doesn't mean everything will become *pay-as-you-go* overnight. I can think of 7 flavors of charging for work: 1️⃣ Pay-as-you-go - No commitment, totally flexible - Enterprise procurement teams usually *hate* this! - Works best when your customers can bill-back the expense or bake it into an operating budget - Otherwise, there's a risk of customers policing their own usage (taximeter effect) 2️⃣ Subscription + pay-as-you-go - Small level of commitment helps 'lock customers in' and give them access to advanced features, support, etc. - Works well when the usage metric is getting commoditized (ex: SMS messages, compute, storage) -- you can advertise a low usage fee & make up for it with the subscription fee - Still not quite loved by enterprise procurement since their bill isn't predictable yet now includes multiple line items... 3️⃣ Three-part tariff (usage subscription + PAYG) - Similar to the above, but with a larger subscription fee that includes some level of usage "included" - Folks usually advertise the initial usage as a gift ("get your first 500 SMS messages for free!") - Including a minimum level of usage helps get the customer hooked & usually incentivizes more overall consumption 4️⃣ Usage-based subscription (high watermark) - Customers commit to a certain level of usage or tier (ex: up to 5,000 API calls per month); this is typically "use it or lose it" - Subscriptions are for a high watermark of usage -- if usage exceeds the plan in a given month, they immediate move into upgrade territory - Fear of overages + usage fluctuations encourages sales to over-sell & customers to over-buy 5️⃣ Usage-based subscription (annual drawdown) - Similar to the above, but the usage allocation can be consumed flexibly over the course of 12 months similar to a gift card - This gives the customer plenty of time to monitor adoption & plan for an early renewal/upgrade if usage is trending above their commit - Great for customers with seasonality or month-to-month usage fluctuations who still want a predictable bill 6️⃣ Roll-overs - If the customer doesn't consume their full allocation, they can "roll it over" to the next year -- typically only if they commit to a flat or increased renewal - More customer friendly, but also more painful to manage! 7️⃣ Adaptive flat rate - The customer commits to a usage-based subscription, but can use the product as much as they want with no overages/upgrades during that period - Their tier resets up/down at renewal based on their actual usage behavior - Much more predictable for customers while encouraging them to increase consumption (downside is that you could be stuck with the costs!) -- I suspect most folks will offer multiple options as they seek to balance lands, expands & tough procurement convos. The downside: complexity.

Bolt exited Croatia. Tazz collapsed in Romania. The 2025 food delivery map isn’t just "consolidating"—it’s solidifying into concrete fortresses. I dove into the latest Pan-European numbers. The era of the "three-player market" is dead. If you aren't #1 or #2, you are bleeding cash. Here is the real state of play across the continent: 1. The "Logistics" vs. "Marketplace" Split Western Europe (UK, France): Uber Eats has effectively won the "frequency war." By cross-selling to ride users, they dominate volume (lunch/fast food), while Just Eat holds onto the high-value "dinner" marketplace. The Nordics: It’s a completely different world. Wolt is impenetrable here. They win on quality and local focus, keeping global giants like Uber at bay. 2. The "Super App" Trap in the South Spain: Glovo is the hegemon with 41% share, despite massive fines. Italy: This is the most interesting battleground. Just Eat makes the most money (highest revenue share), but Glovo has nearly 2x the active users. Why? Because Italians use Glovo for everything (pharmacy, groceries), not just pizza. 3. Profit is the new Viral Just Eat posted €147M in EBITDA. The cash burn is over. Two years ago, these apps lost money on every order just to get you to sign up. Now, they are actually focusing on profit. How? 𝐆𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬. That rider you see isn't just carrying a pizza anymore. He is carrying milk, aspirin, and diapers at 2 PM on a Tuesday. That’s the secret. Food orders peak at lunch and dinner. But couriers need work in between. Groceries fill the gap. It’s not really "Food Delivery" anymore. It’s just local commerce. So, the winners in 2025 aren't just the ones with the best app. It’s the ones who figured out how to deliver a tomato profitably. Who is your go-to app these days?

Subscription beauty in 2027, still growing, but very different from what worked in 2020. A few years ago, subscriptions in beauty felt like a NOVELTY driven by discovery: monthly boxes, sample sizes, surprise. That model hasn’t disappeared, but it’s NO LONGER the center of gravity. As we move into 2027, subscription has evolved into something more PRGAMATIC: a retention engine, a data loop, and, when done well, a margin stabilizer. The short version: subscriptions are still relevant, but only if they solve a real, ongoing need. >>GROWTH has matured. +Beauty e-commerce is growing (high single–low double digits). +U.S. subscription beauty revenue sits around $3–4B. +Retention, monthly churn hits 5–10% without active optimization. +Subscription growth is shifting toward refills, replenishment, and personalization over discovery boxes. >>THREE MODELS are outperforming: The shift: from “subscription box” to “subscription logic”. The winning brands today don’t just sell subscriptions. They build their product and operations around recurring behavior. 1.-Refill-first systems. Concentrates and waterless formats go mainstream: buy once, refill on repeat, lower cost, less waste, less friction. 2.-Routine-based subscriptions. Built around rituals, not randomness, acne, hair repair, skin barrier. The product becomes a system. 3.-Adaptive personalization. No more static quizzes, subscriptions adjust to usage, seasonality, and changing needs. >>PRODUCT CATEGORIES that work best. Not every product belongs in a subscription model. The strongest performers share one thing: they run out. Discovery-heavy categories (like color cosmetics) are weaker unless tied to a system or strong community. +Skincare basics (cleansers, serums, SPF, barrier repair) +Haircare routines (especially treatment-led systems) +Derm-inspired or functional beauty (acne, aging, scalp health) +Ingestible beauty (with caution, regulation and trust matter) +Refillable essentials (deodorant, body care, cleansers) >>Benchmarks to keep in mind (2027 REALITY CHECK) These vary by category, but a healthy subscription DTC brand typically targets. If you’re far off these ranges, the issue is usually product–market fit, not marketing. +Conversion rate (site → subscription): 3–8% +Month 3 retention: 50–70% +Month 6 retention: 35–55% +LTV:CAC ratio: 3:1 or higher +Subscription share of total revenue: 40–70% for mature brands >>A SIMPLE WAY to think about it Subscription in beauty is no longer about selling more products. It’s about OWNING THE ROUTINE. If your brand can become part of someone’s weekly or daily habit, without adding friction, you have a real shot at building a durable DTC business in 2027. Lets go for it! Featured Brands Atolla Biossance Beauty Pie Bite Beauty Color Wow Curology Function of Beauty Hanni Hims / Hers Joonbyrd Prose Routine #beautyprofesionals #dtc #subscriptionbusiness #beautyfounders #ecommerce #brandstrategy #beautybusiness

If you looked at last week’s performance and thought, “Wow, we were down…” dig deeper. It wasn’t just you. Amazon Prime Day shifted buyer behaviour across the board. Many brands felt the impact, lower traffic, slower conversions, and customers holding off for bigger deals elsewhere. Amazon is only growing its share of wallet and burying your head in the sand won’t fix it. So what can you do? 1. Re-evaluate your channel mix You don’t have to sell on Amazon (or maybe you should?) but you do need a strategy for how to compete with it. That might mean exploring marketplaces, refining your owned channels, or even testing Amazon as a top-of-funnel discovery tool (many brands use it for visibility, not margin). 2. Get proactive around retail events Map out key retail moments like Prime Day, Black Friday, and EOFY now. Run your own promos early, lean into loyalty campaigns, or promote “non-discount” value (bundles, GWP, exclusives) to avoid being drowned out. What about free express shipping? 3. Focus on lifetime value A one-week dip isn’t the problem, failing to build long-term customer relationships is. Invest in post-purchase journeys, community engagement, and email/SMS retention flows that outlive Amazon’s flash sales. 4. Strengthen your brand moat Amazon sells products. You sell a brand experience. Use it. Whether it’s through storytelling, content, or service, your brand equity should be doing the heavy lifting, especially when price isn’t your edge. 5. Don’t panic — plan Performance blips are part of the game. But if they keep catching you off guard, it’s time to shift from reactive to resilient. Understand the macro forces at play, and build a commercial calendar that supports consistency, not chaos.

The reality of working with #Amazon has changed dramatically for brands in 2024. The online retailer focuses on: 💵 Optimising margin structures 💵 Reducing headcount resources 💵 Automating repetitive processes The list goes on. 🚩 Yet, most suppliers continue with business as usual. They keep deploying the same investment principles as in offline channels. And they keep their teams locally organised, ignoring Amazon's regional (pan-EU) expansion focus. This creates a gap between the reality of brands and Amazon, where brands increasingly invest in staffing while Amazon dramatically reduces its headcount. So how can brands ensure they align their organisation with the new reality Amazon is creating in 2024 and beyond? ✅ By following a simple 3-step approach: 𝟭. 𝗥𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗲𝘄 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗼𝗿𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝘀𝗲𝘁𝘂𝗽 Amazon's retail workforce is in decline. Layoffs and Automation have made many Vendor Managers redundant. As a result, Amazon has begun to focus its buyer resources at a regional EU level. Instead of 9 Vendor Managers covering each European marketplace, one Vendor Manager manages the EU9 trade relationship today. This requires brands to adjust their organisational structure to navigate the online retailer effectively. Brands that maintain a localised approach risk losing access to a dedicated Vendor Manager in 2024. 𝟮. 𝗥𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗲𝘀 Aligning teams at a regional level can help brands achieve significant economies of scale. Centralising resources can help avoid duplication of work when it comes to negotiation or reporting processes, while the virtual shelf and shopper activation management can be maintained at a local level. Brands that successfully shape their business relationship with Amazon in 2024 will excel in realigning existing workflows at a regional level while meeting and considering the demands of local markets. 𝟯. 𝗔𝘂𝘁𝗼𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝘀𝗵𝗼𝗿𝗲 With Amazon increasing its efforts to offshore and automate tasks in its retail business, brands have to shoulder more tasks that Vendor Managers and Brand Specialists previously owned. This means that offshoring and automation must become a top priority for 1P suppliers themselves if they want to avoid a significant increase in their cost to serve. It's good practice for brands to start capturing repetitive workflows currently done manually and either outsource them to cost-efficient service providers or automate them completely. After all, the size and complexity of Amazon's business will only increase in the years to come. --- How are you adapting your organisation to Amazon's automation and offshoring focus in 2024? Let me know in the comments! #amazonvendor #amazonstrategy

The Platform Fee Revolution: How Zomato & Swiggy’s Silent Tax is Redefining Food Delivery Economics The quiet shift no one missed paying for. Between 2023-25, India’s food delivery landscape witnessed its most critical business model change in a decade, not in delivery speeds, or discounts, but in platform fees. 1. Swiggy: From Rs 2 in April 2023 to Rs 14 by August 2025, a 600% surge. 2. Zomato: From Rs 2 in August 2023 to Rs 10 by October 2024. What looks like a tiny tweak now generates Rs 1900+ crore annually across the duopoly. More importantly, it marks the end of subsidy-led growth and the arrival of consumer-funded sustainability in Indian food delivery. ✅ The Revenue Engine Behind the Shift - Zomato: With 2.5M daily orders, Rs 10 fee delivers Rs 900 crore annually, with just the last Rs 2 hike alone unlocking an additional Rs 180 crore a year. - Swiggy: At 2M daily orders, its Rs 14 fee brings in Rs 1008 crore annually, up from just Rs 144 crore in 2023. Together, platform fees have quietly become the third-largest revenue line item, after commissions and advertising. ✅ Why It Matters Beyond the Numbers 1. The Regressive Tax Effect: Platform fees hit smaller, lower-income orders harder: - A Rs 200 order + Rs 14 fee = 7% surcharge. - A Rs 800 order + Rs 14 fee = 1.75% surcharge. The poorer you are, the more you pay proportionally. 2. Restaurant Economics: Small outlets face falling order volumes and tighter margins. Large chains are building direct delivery ecosystems and subscriptions to bypass platforms. 3. Delivery Partners: Despite the new crores, delivery partners see no direct cut. Instead, they face volatile order volumes, more peak-time pressure, and stagnant payouts. 4. Market Dynamics: Swiggy & Zomato’s near-synchronous hikes point to soft coordination, if not collusion. Fees also raise entry barriers for new players, effectively cementing the duopoly. Let me share #Rajsperspectives 1. Zepto introduced a Rs 2 fee in 2024 (Rs 11 lakh/day extra revenue). Blinkit, Instamart, BigBasket are testing similar models. Quick commerce is set to mirror food delivery’s shift, making “platform fees” a sector-wide standard. 2. Platform fees won’t stay flat. They’re evolving into dynamic pricing models: Surge fees during rain, weekends, or peak dining hours. Location-based charges for “premium zones.” 3. AI-driven personalization where loyal or frequent users see lower/higher fees. Essentially, the “flat tax” is morphing into a flexible toll system, algorithmically managed. Platform fees started as a survival tool. They’re now a profit engine. But the line between sustainability and exploitation is razor thin. The next 3 years will decide: Do platform fees remain a necessary charge to keep the system running Or do they become a barrier to access, innovation & fair competition? Either way, this “silent tax” is no longer a side note, it’s the core of India’s food delivery economics. #food #india #finance #startup #taxes #economy

A brand came to us because a competitor went from zero to number one in their category in under 6 months. They were panicking. They'd been the dominant brand in their niche for years. Strong organic rankings. Good reviews. Loyal customers. But this new competitor wasn't playing in their niche. They were playing in the broader category. Let me explain. The brand owned a specific segment — think of it like owning "organic dog treats" while the competitor went after "dog treats" overall. The niche had about 700,000 searches a year. Solid, but capped. One single broad category keyword had 57,000 searches PER MONTH. The competitor targeted the broad category from day one. Aggressive ads. Clean listing. Competitive price point. Within months they were selling 20,000+ units per month on a single listing. That's roughly $320,000 a month. On one ASIN. When I pulled the impression share report for the brand, they were number 40 for the broad category keyword. Number 40. They weren't even in the conversation. Meanwhile, they were number 1 or 2 for every niche keyword in their segment. Dominant in a small room. Invisible in the building. Here's the thing — the brand actually had better differentiation. Licensed IP. Higher perceived value. A product people already loved. But none of that matters if shoppers searching the broad term never see you. The strategy shift was clear: 👉 Target the broader category keywords aggressively, even at a higher ACOS initially 👉 Lead with the lower price point SKU to compete on the search results page 👉 Use the licensed products as the differentiator once you earn the click 👉 Run sponsored display on the competitor's listing — we already had conversion data showing it would work You can dominate your niche and still be invisible in your category. The ceiling isn't your product. It's the keywords you're willing to go after.

When a market goes from three players to two… the rules change. Deliveroo’s exit from Singapore isn’t just a profitability signal. It’s a market structure shift. For years, Southeast Asia’s food delivery story was built on: → growth → incentives → competition But structurally, many markets were always heading here. Because food delivery doesn’t behave like traditional e-commerce. It depends on: - density - logistics efficiency - repeat behaviour - cost to serve And in markets like Singapore… that typically supports two scaled players — not three. That’s now the reality: → Grab → foodpanda Deliveroo’s exit reflects what happens when scale isn’t sufficient in a system that rewards: density over presence. And this is where things get more interesting. Because consolidation doesn’t just affect platforms. It reshapes the entire ecosystem. In more concentrated markets, over time you tend to see: → less aggressive discounting → more rational pricing → increased focus on margins → stronger platform control Which means: - merchants face tighter economics - consumers see fewer subsidies - platforms gain pricing leverage Not overnight. But gradually. At the same time, demand hasn’t disappeared. Southeast Asia’s food delivery market remains large and active. What’s changing is: how that demand is monetised. And that reflects a broader shift across the region: From: competition-led growth To: structure-led profitability For operators, this isn’t new. It’s the next phase. But it does raise a bigger question: As markets consolidate… who captures the value created by that demand? Because increasingly: It’s not just about who scales. It’s about who controls the system. Sources: Retail Asia, Channel News Asia, Momentum Works, TechNode, e27, DealStreetAsia, Bloomberg, DataReportal, Similarweb, Cube Asia, Gartner. #Ecommerce #SoutheastAsia #DigitalEconomy #FoodDelivery #PlatformEconomy DISCLAIMER Views are based on publicly available information and regional market observations. Intended for discussion purposes only and not financial, legal, or investment advice. https://lnkd.in/gSkRueGY

The first casualty of Keeta’s entry into Saudi Arabia has been announced. The shutdown of Shgardi, after six years and over SAR100M in funding, signals a difficult future for smaller players. The trend is clear in Saudi Arabia's food delivery market: consolidation is inevitable, driven by the aggressive entry of the global giant. Until last year, the market was bustling with 10 active players, including major players like Hungerstation and Jahez, and smaller ones such as Noon Foods, ToYou, Mrsool, and Careem's food delivery. However, the arrival of Keeta, a formidable competitor second only to Uber Eats and DoorDash in size globally (its parent company, Meituan, dwarfs even Delivery Hero), is rapidly shifting the landscape. Keeta's impact is already being felt, with Noon Foods moving its entire food delivery team to its core e-commerce operations. It seems only Hungerstation and potentially Jahez will survive this fierce competition. Jahez’s stock is at it’s lowest since it’s listing and is down by 31% YTD. Jahez’s app has 2.9* rating on Google Play Store with 26k reviews. Food delivery in 2025 demands extreme optimization. Keeta's technology and execution are reportedly unparalleled, characterized by a work-only culture, highly matured playbooks, and skilled Chinese talent. The level of technology, access to capital, and talent that Keeta brings is something the region hasn't seen before and may not be ready for. I would expect more consolidation. Smaller players have no other option but to pivot or shut down. The bigger ones should be sitting in their board rooms and discussing M&A. Do you think the landscape is going to be any different in the UAE? Will Careem, Noon and Talabat be able to take on Keeta? I am bullish on Keeta.