Reliance’s Kirana-Driven Delivery Model Throws a Wrench for Salesmen

The mom-and-pop stores, known as ‘kiranas’, can order goods on JioMart Partner with deliveries promised within 24 hours. That means salesmen representing consumer giants face an existential threat to their business.

Sangli (Maharashtra): For eight straight days, household goods salesman Vipresh Shah has failed to sell a single pack of Dettol soap to the storekeepers who have been buying from him ever since he took over his family business as a teenager, 14 years ago.

Shah is an official distributor for Britain’s Reckitt Benckiser in Vita, near Sangli city, around 200 miles south of Mumbai. But he said once-loyal customers now point to an app – JioMart Partner – on their smartphones showing prices up to 15% lower, instead of placing orders.

“As Reckitt’s distributor, I used to be like a prince in the market,” said Shah. “Now the buyer tells me, ‘See how much you’ve been ripping us off!'”

The 31-year-old said he lost $2,000 of his own money as he discounted products to match prices on JioMart, the app rolled out by Reliance Industries billionaire Mukesh Ambani in his drive to revolutionise retail distribution in India.

Up and down India in places like small town Vita, the momandpop stores that account for four-fifths of a near-$900 billion retail market, more than $700 billion are increasingly turning to JioMart to stock up on foreign and domestic brands.

Just as Ambani, India’s richest man, has disrupted the country’s telecoms industry, the tycoon is intent on shaking up retail distribution, taking on U.S. e-commerce giants like Amazon and Walmart Inc, expanding fast in India.

The country has around 450,000 traditional distributors, who have legions of salespeople to service every corner of the vast nation, including 600,000 villages. They typically earn a margin of 3-5% on product prices and mostly take orders physically once a week, making deliveries to retailers within a couple of days.

But Reliance’s model throws a wrench in that supply chain: the momandpop stores, known as ‘kiranas’, can order goods on JioMart Partner with deliveries promised within 24 hours. Reliance also offers training on ordering, credit facilities and free product samples for affiliated kiranas’ customers.

That means hundreds of thousands of salesmen representing consumer giants like Reckitt, Unilever and Colgate-Palmolive, face an existential threat to their business, according to interviews with salespeople, 20 distributors and a trader group with members across India.

Many of the distributors contacted by Reuters said they have slashed their workforce or vehicle fleet, seeing their sales from door-to-door agents drop 20-25% in the last year as shopkeepers partner with Reliance.

In Vita, salesman Shah said he has had to lay off half of his staff of four. He fears the 50-year-old family firm might not last beyond the next six months.

Also read: ‘Nomadland’ Is a Glimpse Into Why China Is the Us of Asia

‘Guerrilla tactics’

The scale and speed of the disruption have triggered tensions between traditional distributors and Reliance that have boiled over into physical confrontation in some cases.

In Maharashtra state in the west – home to Vita – and Tamil Nadu in south, traditional salesmen have organised blockades of some JioMart delivery vehicles.

“We will employ guerrilla tactics,” said Dhairyashil Patil, president of the All India Consumer Products Distributors Federation, which represents 400,000 agents of local and foreign consumer firms. “We will continue to agitate,” he told Reuters, “we want (consumer goods) companies to realise our value.”

Reliance remains undeterred in pushing ahead with Ambani‘s “new commerce” retail venture, first announced in 2018.

A shopkeeper selling consumer goods displays Reliance's JioMart point-of-sale machine that he uses to order supplies for his store in Sangli, in the western state of Maharashtra, India, October 21, 2021. REUTERS/Abhirup Roy

A shopkeeper selling consumer goods displays Reliance’s JioMart point-of-sale machine that he uses to order supplies for his store in Sangli, in Maharashtra, October 21, 2021. Photo: Reuters/Abhirup Roy

Last year it raised funds from marquee investors including Silver Lake Partners and KKR & Co Inc as it seeks to integrate momandpop stores in what it has touted as a more inclusive approach to digital commerce. That push is widely seen countering the likes of Amazon, which have for years faced – and denied – claims in India of favouring select big sellers at the expense of smaller retailers.

A source close to Reliance said the company was determined to keep expanding its business for momandpop stores. It believes its model can co-exist alongside the traditional approach in one of the world’s biggest retail markets, the person said, declining to be identified because of lack of authority to disclose company plans.

Ambani in 2018 said he eventually wanted to connect 30 million small merchants to the Reliance network. So far, it has 300,000 merchant partners in 150 cities who order consumer goods from Reliance, but the transformation will be magnified many times over if it meets a target of adding 10 million partner stores by 2024.

Reliance did not respond to requests for comment for this article.

Colgate declined to comment, while Reckitt said its customers and distributors were an integral part of its business but it does not comment on its relationship with them. Unilever’s India arm, Hindustan Unilever, did not respond to a request for comment.

Also read: Paytm Listing: And They All Fall Down…

Which channel?

The traditional distribution methods remain important to the consumer goods makers, even amid the disruption, industry watchers say.

Himanshu Bajaj, former Asia consumer and retail head at consulting firm Kearney, said CEOs of consumer firms he met in September raised concerns about Reliance’s strategy upsetting the traditional distribution chain.

“The companies don’t want to kill their own distributors. The worry is real,” he said.

Asked about Reliance’s model and concerns among distributors, Sunil D’Souza, CEO of India’s Tata Consumer Products, told Reuters in an interview last month it “can’t afford to sit back and ignore” any major distribution channel, but Tata was trying to minimise conflict and strike a balance.

Jefferies in March estimated kiranas will “steadily increase the share of procurement” from Reliance “at the cost of traditional distributors”. Such sales for Reliance could mushroom to $10.4 billion by 2025 from just $200 million in 2021-22, Jefferies estimates.

One executive who works for a rival to Reliance said Ambani “was spreading his wings very fast” in servicing kiranas and already has an edge on negotiating prices, due to long-standing relationships with consumer good makers which have for years counted Reliance and its 1,100 supermarkets as a big client.

With kirana partners, Ambani is adding another, major vertical. “Brands cannot afford to sideline Reliance, it’s just their sheer purchasing power,” said the executive, who declined to be identified as he wasn’t authorised to speak with media.

All about pricing

Many kiranas are cramped shops in ageing buildings, where branded products are placed on wooden shelves and small sachets dangle from the ceiling. Such retailers are embracing Reliance as a means to boost profit margins.

When Reuters accompanied Anuruddh Mishra, a sales agent for Colgate, during a field trip in Mumbai’s Dharavi area, he struggled to convince Shivkumar Singh, the 50-year-old owner of a dilapidated store, to make purchases. Dharavi is home to 1 million people and rated one of the world’s biggest slums.

Singh opened his JioMart app and showed the far lower prices on offer. “How can I order from traditional distributors?” he said. “The difference in price is huge. Now I order mostly from Reliance.”

Shivkumar Singh, an owner of a store selling consumer goods, speaks with a sales representative at his store in Dharavi, Mumbai, in the western state of Maharashtra, India, September 16, 2021. REUTERS/Francis Mascarenhas

Shivkumar Singh, an owner of a store selling consumer goods, speaks with a sales representative at his store in Dharavi, Mumbai, in Maharashtra, September 16, 2021. Photo: Reuters/Francis Mascarenhas

A Reuters review of purchase deals on the JioMart Partner app showed the Dharavi retailer could bulk buy a two-tube combo of Colgate MaxFresh toothpaste for about 115 rupees ($1.55). Salesman Mishra’s distribution company gets it for 145 rupees, and his last offer to the Dharavi retailer was 154 rupees – still more than a third higher than the Reliance price.

Back in Sangli, traditional distributors said they have at times chased down Reliance vehicles and confronted drivers, alleging unauthorised deliveries.

Sunil Pujari, who works in the city for one JioMart delivery agent, said he had been warned by his supervisors to immediately alert them if angry distributors stopped vehicles.

But business remains brisk.

“Prices offered by JioMart cannot be matched by anyone,” he said, making another delivery in a crowded market.

(Reuters)

Amazon, Tata Say Centre’s E-Commerce Rules Will Hit Businesses

The government’s tough new e-commerce rules announced on June 21 aimed at strengthening protection for consumers, caused concern among the country’s online retailers.

New Delhi: Amazon.com Inc and India’s Tata Group warned government officials on Saturday that plans for tougher rules for online retailers would have a major impact on their business models, four sources familiar with the discussions told Reuters.

At a meeting organised by the consumer affairs ministry and the government’s investment promotion arm, Invest India, many executives expressed concerns and confusion over the proposed rules and asked that the July 6 deadline for submitting comments be extended, said the sources.

The government’s tough new e-commerce rules announced on June 21 aimed at strengthening protection for consumers, caused concern among the country’s online retailers, notably market leaders Amazon and Walmart Inc’s Flipkart.

New rules limiting flash sales, barring misleading advertisements and mandating a complaints system, among other proposals, could force the likes of Amazon and Flipkart to review their business structures, and may increase costs for domestic rivals including Reliance Industries’ JioMart, BigBasket and Snapdeal.

Amazon argued that COVID-19 had already hit small businesses and the proposed rules will have a huge impact on its sellers, arguing that some clauses were already covered by existing law, two of the sources said.

The sources asked not to be named as the discussions were private.

The proposed policy states e-commerce firms must ensure none of their related enterprises are listed as sellers on their websites. That could impact Amazon in particular as it holds an indirect stake in at least two of its sellers, Cloudtail and Appario.

On that proposed clause, a representative of Tata Sons, the holding company of India’s $100 billion Tata Group, argued that it was problematic, citing an example to say it would stop Starbucks – which has a joint-venture with Tata in India – from offering its products on Tata’s marketplace website.

The Tata executive said the rules will have wide ramifications for the conglomerate, and could restrict sales of its private brands, according to two of the sources.

Tata declined to comment.

The sources said that a consumer ministry official argued that the rules were meant to protect consumers and were not as strict as those of other countries. The ministry did not respond to a request for comment.

A Reliance executive agreed that the proposed rules would boost consumer confidence, but added that some clauses needed clarification.

Reliance did not respond to request for comment.

The rules were announced last month amid growing complaints from India’s brick-and-mortar retailers that Amazon and Flipkart bypass foreign investment law using complex business strcutures. The companies deny any wrongdoing.

A Reuters investigation in February cited Amazon documents that showed it gave preferential treatment to a small number of its sellers and bypassed foreign investment rules. Amazon has said it does not give favourable treatment to any seller.

The government will soon issue certain clarifications on the foreign investment rules, Indian commerce minister Piyush Goyal told reporters on Friday.

(Reuters)

Google Buys 7.7% of Reliance’s Digital Unit Jio for $4.5 billion

Google’s investment in Jio Platforms is at a valuation of Rs 4.36 trillion ($58.01 billion) for the digital platform, the company said in a statement.

New Delhi: Reliance Industries on Wednesday said Alphabet Inc’s Google will buy a 7.7% stake in its digital unit for $4.5 billion, winning the backing of another US tech giant after Facebook Inc in late April.

With Google’s investment, strategic and financial investors have committed a total of Rs 1.52 trillion ($20.22 billion) in the last few months, Reliance chairman and billionaire tycoon Mukesh Ambani said at the company’s annual shareholders meeting hosted via a webcast.

Google’s investment in Jio Platforms is at a valuation of Rs 4.36 trillion ($58.01 billion) for the digital platform, the company said in a statement.

The unit houses music and movie apps but its mainstay is telecoms firm Jio Infocomm – India’s largest mobile carrier with more than 387 million users.

Also read: Four Reasons Why Facebook is Buying a Nearly 10% Stake in Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Jio

The Reliance-Google announcement comes just days after Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai said his company would invest $10 billion in India over the next five to seven years through equity deals and tie-ups.

The deal with Google will bolster Reliance’s lofty tech ambitions, such as building smart homes, using solutions similar to Amazon.com Inc’s Alexa voice assistant, connected cars and security systems.

The investment arms of chipmakers Qualcomm Inc’s and Intel Corp have also bought stakes in Jio Platforms this month, at a time India is preparing to auction 5G airwaves to telecoms service providers.

Facebook-Jio Deal: What India’s Competition Regulator Will Have to Consider

The devil lies in the details.

When two huge conglomerates come together, the news is usually mixed —  good and bad. 

The recent partnership between Reliance Jio and Facebook will give huge business benefits for India’s small businesses and  kirana-stores through  Jio-Mart’s hyperlocal offering, giving them access to a digitalised ecosystem. WhatsApp Pay could shake up the payment ecosystem where sending money is as easy as sending a message. 

The negative side of this is that it could end up producing a data Frankenstein of sorts, giving a micro understanding of millions of consumers. The general idea is that the added power of Facebook, a platform where advertisers can target people based on their interests, and bingo — nothing about you is unknown. 

While the details of their working relationship are unknown, if Jio and Facebook share information with each other, a complete portrait of a consumer, her passion, interests, expenditures etc could be mapped out in a manner that would make her privacy vulnerable.

What is the big deal?

There are a number of issues at play here. Firstly, the strong network effects of digital platform economies. Second, the relevance of volume and variety of data as a key factor to provide high quality service and how that serves as a competitive advantages. Third, whether the mere combination of both types of user data (WhatsApp and Jio) will allow the new entity to achieve a position that could not be replicated by competitors leading to foreclosure of the market(s).

The success of the business model of various (multi) two-sided virtual platforms like Google, Facebook, and Uber among others depends on collecting user data. The data as input may be used to get ad-revenue or improve internal algorithms for the paid side of the platform. The potential of data analytics gives a crucial competitive advantage to the advertisement-driven business model. 

By restricting the supply of user data, a dominant player can successfully restrict its competitors from gaining critical mass (in terms of both scale and scope) that is crucial to stay viable in a digital market. 

Very often, big digital businesses are not confined to providing just one or two services. They offer a whole range of access to different areas with an ecosystem of services that are designed to work together well. The goal of producers is to essentially lock-in their customers and lock-out the competition. This is accomplished by creating a value proposition for their customers and making it difficult for them to leave the fold because of the high switching costs.

In developed jurisdictions, data leveraging has been considered as a serious anti-trust issue and various competition regulators have fined both Google and Facebook. 

Two recent cases on the competition assessment of data-driven markets are the European Commission’s decision against Google in the Android licensing case, and Bundeskartellamt’s (German Competition Authority) action against Facebook. Both decisions were concerned with anti-competitive foreclosure, leveraging technology – with the motivation to illegally acquire data to score an advantage over the competitors.

The Competition Commission of India (CCI) is also investigating the Google-Android case for abusive and anti-competitive restraints in Google’s licensing practices of its Operating System by imposing conditions (on mobile manufacturers) like the pre-installation of Google Search app in Android phones. 

When is privacy an anti-trust issue?

Restrictions around data portability help firms maintain or grow their market power. A social network’s default settings ( restricting choice ) are an important initial sales pitch since consumers are reluctant to change default settings as it is cumbersome to change them. This induces users to maintain the status and creates a disadvantage called the ‘status quo bias’.

In 2017, the CCI closed cases against both WhatsApp and Jio involving allegations of predatory pricing and privacy violations. In both these decisions, the regulator did not consider the restrictions around data portability as a competitive advantage.  

The European Commission has analysed data related mergers in the last decade starting from Google/DoubleClick to Microsoft/Linkedin, Verizon/Yahoo and Facebook / WhatsApp to name a few – identifying possible harming effects of the control over exclusive information or an absolute foreclosure scenario. The commission’s tendency has been to avoid over-enforcement — balancing the efficiency defence doctrine with theories of harm of financial power and portfolio effect. 

However, it seems difficult to maintain a non-interventionist stance. On the one hand it is not only questionable whether efficiency considerations are the norm in big data merger cases, it is also difficult to define data specific economic efficiencies that have to be assessed with due regard for data protection obligations. On the other hand, the evidence shows how during the last years some data-driven markets instead of having been disrupted by new, innovative products or services, have even increased their strong market positions like Google’s search engine or Facebook’s social network and communication online services.

Therefore, they stress the need for considering conditional remedies that tackle potential issues of lack of foreseeability.

How can the CCI assess competition and consumer choice?

Given that both Jio and Facebook are among the top three holders of subscribers in India in their respective services, are these companies in a position to unfairly compete against competitor service providers by ‘directing’ its customers to use, for instance, the Jio Mart service? That is, will consumers have unfettered freedom to choose other alternatives like Bigbasket, Goffers (in online grocery ), or Amazon and Flipkart (in retail)? 

Given the new app could provide various services (one-stop-shopping) through a ‘super-app’ and may acquire the status of a dominant hyperlocal service provider, will consumers be free to choose their service without pre-installation of app over the phone, or will the merged company’s significant subscriber base be “ushered” through technical price discrimination or by requiring users to pass through a proprietary first screen? In other words, will  users of Jio/FB/WhatsApp/Instagram  be led into content cul-de-sacs owned and operated by Jio / Facebook?

Concerns of dataopolies in digital conglomerate cases  

The mere accumulation of data may create an advantage that increases the risk of further anti-competitive behaviour. 

Some possible data leveraging advantages for attempted monopolization could be: 

1) A theory of leveraging. The classic example of leveraging is when Microsoft used its quasi-monopoly on the client PC operating systems market to extend it to the media player market – in view of the indirect network effects. In this case the concern is that both Jio and Facebook through Whatsapp could potentially use the market dominance it has gained in the telecom and social networking services to create dominance in the e-commerce market through unlawful anticompetitive acts. These unlawful anti-competitive acts include tying, monopolistic refusals to deal, predatory pricing, and new product proliferation. These unlawful anticompetitive acts however can also independently give rise to liability under Section 3(4) and Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002.

2) Next, there must be a determination whether a probability exists that any anti-competitive acts of Jio or Facebook would have the dangerous probability of creating a monopoly in the online groceries and/or other new markets entered into through Jio Mart as a Super-app. Having a significant number of combined users, no other platform could begin to compare to Jio-FB combined market power. It is not unreasonable to forecast that JioMart alone would quickly become the dominant competitor in the hyperlocal market if free to do so, just like Jio alone gained 380 million users in about three years.

3) Portfolio effect. Increasing the range of brands, by bundling of say, telecom and other service offerings or illegal vertical restraints, even predatory pricing. This in turn may lead to greater ability of further leveraging, deterring innovation and results in degradation of quality.

Other concerns on data exclusivity post-merger could include whether consumers will have a choice or how could the ecosystem leave consumers locked in. Does the consent for data collection include information that is not relevant for retail? Is there potential for misuse of of power to generate and/or share more information that is profitable to the platform, for instance, with the intention of suggesting a grocery list? Such strategies often make the consumer totally dependent on the app achieving a status quo bias.       

Summing up the theory of harm of a relative market foreclosure scenario – the data induced economic power generates greater advantages than in the pre-digital era – where the advantage is not to a specific relevant market but to the whole conglomerate’s digital ecosystem.

Till now, there has not been a clear and consistent approach adopted by CCI in both anti-trust and merger cases of platform markets. Lessons from the past anti-competitive analysis by different competition authorities are relevant today to understand the diversification in the digital economy. Remedies in merger control play a major role of restoring competition in the market. The CCI could mandate certain commitments to address the obvious antitrust concerns raised by the merger. Two major concerns being ensuring open access for rival service providers and interoperability of data and / or treating it as an essential facility.

Cost benefit analysis 

Does the free market today reflect consumer welfare even as digital monopolists have no incentive to innovate which amounts to de-grading quality? When calculating the economic impact of conglomerates like Jio-FB, one needs to consider potential market power as well. However, at present, the vulnerability of the consumer is most crucial when data privacy law is fuzzy. 

Huge benefits will come with huge costs. While regulators grapple with the digital market structures and consumers are confused with data strategies of the tech giants, the Competition Commission of India can provide a way forward by a robust and sophisticated market analysis, mandating commitments to allow the deal to go through.

Anupam Sanghi is an experienced Commercial and Competition lawyer with expertise in the TMT sector.