Jayne Mathias's Profile
I had no idea Amazon studios attempted to crowd source their scripts! This was a great article. Similar to Energy, I am surprised that the initiative was not more successful. With that said, I am sure talent agencies/other studio companies similarly receive thousands of submissions annually — meaning there must be some way to manage high submission volume. Would Amazon be able to invest in more (cost-effective) human capital to sift through the scripts, and advance promising story lines?
I agree that there may be some PR value in Amazon maintaining the initiative at a surface level — but I also think a more mature media company may realize the true benefits of crowd sourcing. A company like Netflix, who is on the hook for extensive original content each year, may find crowd sourcing particularly cost effective — especially given its eye for strong scripts and story lines. As long as there is an efficient process in place, many companies should stand to benefit from tapping a broader pool of talent.
What an interesting article! I had never considered the applications of 3D printing to food. I wonder, however, if this technological enhancement may face similar resistance as genetic modification. Of course 3D printing is not fundamentally altering the biological make-up of food, but it did bring to the forefront discussion around 100% natural and/or fresh products. Will 3D printing’s implementation suddenly raise the value of hand-made pasta? Will the limitation of 3D printing be non-perishables, where consumers value authentic freshness less?
With that said, however, I agree with ABCDEF’s point above regarding the experiential/branding opportunity 3D printing represents. Barilla can leverage this technology to create custom and ornate pasta designs, which will undoubtedly delight its current clientele, and likely intrigue new customers. Operating efficiencies may even make high quality pasta both available and cost effective in once inaccessible parts of the world!
What a fascinating article! Farfetch has done an incredible job incorporating data analytics into its ecommerce platform. From a vendor perspective, however, a frustrating aspect when working with Farfetch is (1) it does not share its data, which dilutes individual brand incentives to partner with Farfetch; and (2) the presentation specialty boutiques offer of certain brands may not align with that brand’s visual merchandising standards. For example, if Chanel sells handbags to boutique A, boutique A is the partner who offers Chanel handbag photos to Farfetch, not Chanel. This has created much tension between brands, boutiques and Farfetch. If Farfetch is to build a sustainable luxury model (and therefore maintain its high volume of data inputs), I expect they will have to address this conflict and work to resolve it.
The other doubt I have regarding Farfetch is the scalability of its “Store of the Future.” Farfetch has marketed this concept for years, but has only one store to show for it. Perhaps it will increase its number of partnerships from exclusively Chanel — but if not, I doubt this concept will have much impact on the retail industry.
I agree, Erika — this article makes me want take-out, STAT.
The rising commoditization of food delivery apps will indeed present some trouble for Swiggy. Unless it fosters exclusive restaurant relationships (similar to Caviar in the US), Swiggy will have to rely on logistical prowess to maintain a competitive advantage over Google and Uber Eats. To do so, Erika proposes some thoughtful solutions. I agree delivery speed is paramount, and Swiggy should experiencing a short- medium-term advantage with its thorough understanding of the Indian marketplace. Perhaps another option to avert traffic challenges is to further increase the number of restaurants available on the site — which will raise the number of restaurants within a radius of a customer. Swiggy can then offer a dynamic delivery radius depending on the level of traffic, with restaurants available rising and falling to ensure delivery occurs in a timely manner.
With that said, Uber, Google and Amazon’s infiltration is imminent, and its resources are likely to far exceed that of Swiggy. The larger logistical advantage Swiggy builds, however, the better it can position itself as a potential acquisition target!
This piece was fascinating. I had never heard of Natura, and its crowdsourcing model seems to inject a unique sense of authenticity into the brand. Regarding a sustainable competitive advantage, I believe the emotional connection Natura creates through engaging its customer base differentiates it from other beauty players. Competitors may replicate Natura’s products, but they will not be able to replicate the client relationship Natura forges when involving customers in product development. Moreover, any competitive efforts to implement a similar crowdsourcing model will be a transparent copycat strategy, likely to deter more customers than its attracts.
The author also raises an interesting point regarding the potential channel conflict between brick & mortar and ecommerce. The rise of the online beauty pressure is unlikely to abate, meaning the company will have to downsize its direct-selling channel. Given how large this channel appears (1.4M sales people), I expect this strategic shift to dramatically alter the fabric of the company — but such a transformation will be necessary if it is to survive the beauty industry’s rapid evolution.