It leaves us with the question as to what it is going to take to break open the supermarket duopoly.
I’ll have to be honest that beyond being vaguely familiar with its name, I knew very little about Supie.
To be really honest, I think “bugger all” might be more accurate because —as a consumer— it really just hadn't registered with me.
And maybe there’s something in that, in that any new player is going to have to begin as an instantly massive and substantial player with an already established reputation overseas.
But it does raise the question as to how much responsibility we bear for that. What would it take for us to change our habits? How much of this is on us?
Because while there are other options for online shopping, I think the fact that we are creatures of habit is going to be a very difficult factor for any new entrant into the market to compete with.
For example, one of our guests on the Weekend Collective, on the Smart Money segment sent me a link to one of the smaller players in fresh fruit and veg which, on the face of it, offers huge savings.
I have to confess, I can't recall if I’ve even told my wife about it. And look, that's on me —and I am making a note to follow up on it— but the thing I wonder is if we have some sort of reservation about any online supplier that doesn't also have a bricks and mortar operation.
So the question is: what is it going to take?
What is it going to take for a competitor to establish itself and break the supermarket duopoly?
We do our shopping online but we do our shopping online with one of the two existing duopoly monsters. Maybe the reason is that their presence is so, well, omnipresent.
They’re everywhere. They’re brick and mortar, we all know the names, and it just feels like a safe, easy option, not too much thinking goes into it.
So when it comes to weekly shopping they are foremost in our minds, and I think that’s the biggest challenge any new supermarket player would have.
But how much of it is on us, and what do you think it would take, and what does a new competitor need to bring to the market?
I would suggest it needs to be something where a brand is instantly recognizable from overseas, with built in credibility. It needs to instantly be something that can compete in the heavyweight division and not something that's going to rely on a mixture of investment and organic word of mouth growth.
It can’t be a start-up business hoping to establish a presence over time, it’s going to have to be something that is already massive overseas that decides it’s going to put us out of our baked in duopoly misery.
But perhaps when we whinge about the absence of competition —as creatures of habit— we really only have ourselves to blame.
Tim is a musician who co-hosts several shows on Newstalk ZB, has worked for a couple of years as a barrister and solicitor in his home town of Rotorua. This article was first published HERE
And maybe there’s something in that, in that any new player is going to have to begin as an instantly massive and substantial player with an already established reputation overseas.
But it does raise the question as to how much responsibility we bear for that. What would it take for us to change our habits? How much of this is on us?
Because while there are other options for online shopping, I think the fact that we are creatures of habit is going to be a very difficult factor for any new entrant into the market to compete with.
For example, one of our guests on the Weekend Collective, on the Smart Money segment sent me a link to one of the smaller players in fresh fruit and veg which, on the face of it, offers huge savings.
I have to confess, I can't recall if I’ve even told my wife about it. And look, that's on me —and I am making a note to follow up on it— but the thing I wonder is if we have some sort of reservation about any online supplier that doesn't also have a bricks and mortar operation.
So the question is: what is it going to take?
What is it going to take for a competitor to establish itself and break the supermarket duopoly?
We do our shopping online but we do our shopping online with one of the two existing duopoly monsters. Maybe the reason is that their presence is so, well, omnipresent.
They’re everywhere. They’re brick and mortar, we all know the names, and it just feels like a safe, easy option, not too much thinking goes into it.
So when it comes to weekly shopping they are foremost in our minds, and I think that’s the biggest challenge any new supermarket player would have.
But how much of it is on us, and what do you think it would take, and what does a new competitor need to bring to the market?
I would suggest it needs to be something where a brand is instantly recognizable from overseas, with built in credibility. It needs to instantly be something that can compete in the heavyweight division and not something that's going to rely on a mixture of investment and organic word of mouth growth.
It can’t be a start-up business hoping to establish a presence over time, it’s going to have to be something that is already massive overseas that decides it’s going to put us out of our baked in duopoly misery.
But perhaps when we whinge about the absence of competition —as creatures of habit— we really only have ourselves to blame.
Tim is a musician who co-hosts several shows on Newstalk ZB, has worked for a couple of years as a barrister and solicitor in his home town of Rotorua. This article was first published HERE
3 comments:
Perhaps consumers are not as dissatisfied with the main grocery providers as the media would have us believe. If they were dissatisfied, operators like Supie would have gained enough of a market share to be viable.
Also, why is it assumed there is no competition already? Growers markets, the Warehouse, Cosco, boutique providers, home gardeners... are all a source of competition.
The issue regarding the big players is whether they use their dominant position to engage in "unfair" (ie anti-competitive) practices against suppliers and potential competitors. That is the only issue that needs to be looked at, as it is for all industries.
Maybe our soon to be ex-government has to accept a fair bit of responsibility.
After all, when they and their puppet master at the RNZ printed tens of billions of dollars that drove inflation above 7% and then continued to hike up fuel taxes which both sent prices rising, then it was convenient to have someone to blame.
The Supermarkets were a prime target. I'm not saying there isn't price fixing or collusion between the big two... but I'm not saying there is either. Show me the proof.
Bottom line is we don't have a monopoly. More would be better but getting started in the physical supermarket business which requires chains of stores nationwide is a big ask for any newcomer.
Online shopping should be much cheaper. Maybe just 2 or so distribution centres (one in each island) which can store all the produce then send it out.
Of course that's a lot of courier deliveries and hiking fuel taxes ain't going to help prices.
And let's face it, our productivity has been declining for years, so we pay people more in terms of real wages and hours worked to do the same amount or even less than they used to. Don't mention the dreaded P-word though. That implies more work and effort.
Yes "anonymous" is right. It is the function of Parliament to legislate for proper commercial practice and proscribe sanctions against companies that break the law.
And it is the function of governments to properly administer the law.
It is the function of the Opposition to expose failures and propose remedies.
The last thing we need is the appointment of yet another "commissioner", with accompany bureaucracy to get involved.
And with respect to the issues raised by this article, we certainly don't need media jockies trying to pick winners! Especially as he admits he had been too lazy to avail himself of the many alternatives!
Aren't we thoroughly sick of Nanny State attempting to run our lives?
Post a Comment