Regarding full custody and Southeast Asia, I have seen, heard, and thought。

Our business does not involve Southeast Asia, but it must be said that Southeast Asia is currently the region with the most active flow of funds.

Many friends who were planning to enter the US region have quickly transitioned to Southeast Asia and reapplied to open cross-border stores. In their words, “Since you can’t eat fat, you’ll have to take a few bites of pork ribs

Then, several platforms are undergoing reforms at the same time, and the PK between Lazada, Shopee, TikTok Shop, and several platforms is also becoming increasingly fierce. Make the entire market increasingly hot. From the surface data, for example, in Vietnam, the backend traffic of TikTok Shop has exceeded that of the old Lazada.

These friends also know that different qualifications and categories have been applied for by various platforms. As long as it is fully managed, as long as there is a investment manager who comes to actively seek him, he will add and do everything.

At the same time, the existing operation team will not be disbanded temporarily. Those who can open local stores will open local stores, otherwise they will also open a cross-border store. Use the existing team to operate.

It depends on which of these two models is more profitable. He also does not shy away from saying that if the data is not ideal, the existing team may gradually transform or dissolve in the future. “There is no way, the cost of raising people in the current model is really too high

So, they are preparing to go through cross-border stores and full custody together. See which side can achieve better results. Which side has more operating space. There’s no choice, this is also to get through the cycle of letting the resources already invested float and be wasted after being pigeoned by the US district. It can be considered a helpless choice.

Over the weekend, I had a lively conversation with a friend who opened a factory in Wuhan about these things. His feedback is not that good. My face is a bit livid. According to his intention, the model adopted by these platforms seems to have cut off intermediate links and directly connected to the factory, giving away profits to the factory. But the problem is that the operational logic of both parties is different. The logic of the factory has always been that if you place an order, I will produce it again; I’ll do as much as you order. But now this mode has changed, I need to stock up first. Once the inventory of this product runs out, the platform will remove it from your shelves. I won’t help you sell it anymore. There are indeed many hidden losses for factories here.

Meanwhile, it seems that this model can guarantee quantity, but for factories, only the agreed products can be bound to that portion of products with fixed profits. It is difficult to have room for breakthroughs afterwards. It’s been a long time, not good.

At the same time, the platform now seems to have various subsidies and discounts that are very attractive. Once it stops throwing money like this in the future, the policy will change. For example, warehousing requires payment, and logistics also requires collect payment. Calculate these. How much profit can be given to the factory afterwards?

One weekend, face-to-face communication with frontline operations and factories. The gains are indeed different. Put away your restless heart and continue to tremble and walk on thin ice in the current environment. Just be careful, it’s great.


Post time: Jun-19-2023