A couple of years ago, money was no object when it
came to e-commerce. Companies spent lavishly on
technology in their rush to establish a Web
presence. But the economic picture has changed
significantly, and companies now are much more careful
when it comes to such spending.
"The realization has sunk in that while B2C sales are
growing and will continue to grow, they will not take
over the retail world," Giga Information
Group analyst
Andrew Bartels told the E-Commerce Times.
With the possible exception of travel and -- to a certain
degree -- books and music, online is still second best.
"It has become clear that the online channel, in most
instances, is never going to be the dominant channel,"
Bartels said.
Spending Slows
According to a recent
Forrester report,
spending on e-commerce technology will decline from 2001 levels of 3.5
percent of revenue, or $41 million, and will total just 3
percent, or $29 million, in 2002.
According to Gartner (NYSE: IT) Dataquest
analyst Judith Rosall, worldwide spending on e-commerce software applications
fell 30 percent in 2001.
"There is no question the
economic downturn played a major factor in the
postponement of e-commerce software-related
initiatives among businesses," Rosall told the
E-Commerce Times.
Spending on e-commerce technology has "moved from
hyperdrive to a much more measured process," Bartels
said. The trick is to figure out how much must be
spent -- and in what areas -- to keep a company
competitive.
Investing Proportionally
Faced with the realization that e-commerce is not the
be-all or end-all of retail, companies have started
looking more closely at their e-commerce budgets.
"The channel has not gone away, but now companies are
investing in the channel commensurate with its value,"
Bartels noted.
Rosall said e-commerce spending decisions are
being driven more and more by expected return on
investment.
"An early (four- to six-month) return on investment of
approximately 10 to 22 percent would be an early
indicator that a specific e-commerce software
initiative has significant potential to affect a
business' bottom line," Rosall said.
Concentrate Spending
According to Rosall, companies should focus
their spending on improving customer satisfaction and
loyalty, reducing sales and marketing costs, and
making the process of online procurement and supplier
management more efficient.
Another area in which companies likely will
concentrate e-commerce spending is tracking.
While online merchants have not taken over the retail
world in the way many thought they would, a growing
number of consumers are using the Web to research products
before making a purchase. Some even use
the Web to find a product, then go to a
brick-and-mortar outlet to make the purchase.
Companies need to do a better job of tracking how many
leads a site generates and whether those leads
result in offline sales. "The real value lies not
in the transaction but in the leads, but they are
having a hard time tracking those," Bartels said.
For companies that have both a brick-and-mortar
presence and a Web site, stores generally deliver
90 to 95 percent of the sales and virtually all of the profits.
Therefore, Bartels noted, the value of a Web site will be
determined by how many leads it delivers to other sales
channels. Internet companies that devote resources
to developing good lead-tracking systems will be more
successful than those that do not.
From B2C to B2B
Another way in which e-commerce spending patterns will
change, according to Bartels, is in a movement away
from B2C (business-to-consumer) and toward
B2B (business-to-business).
Giga Information Group has predicted that e-commerce spending
will rebound by 2003 to the $1 billion level first reached in
2000, but only about $150 million of that sum will be
devoted to B2C e-commerce technology.
In the future, the lion's share of e-commerce spending will
focus on B2B, on systems that can be used to sell online to
both consumers and corporations, and on companies that
use Web sites to generate sales leads.
That said, there still will be a need for straight B2C
e-tailers, and those companies should spend money to make
their sites as easy to use as possible.
"It is important for
companies to cater to those consumers who don't feel
the need to trek all the way to the store and are
perfectly happy to buy something sight unseen,"
Bartels said.
Instant Messaging: The Next E-Commerce Channel April 26, 2002
No company has the necessary infrastructure to handle the possible volume of IM requests,
Gartner's Batchelder noted, adding that competing IM standards are also an impediment.
Related Stories
Amazon Sells More, Loses Less April 23, 2002
Amazon's own predictions called for a result ranging from breakeven to a $16 million
operating loss, but the company instead posted a $2 million operating profit.
EBay Meets Street But Tumbles on Growth Worries April 18, 2002
EBay said it expects to record a positive second quarter and fiscal year, coming in
on the high side of its earlier predictions.
What's Holding Back the Tech Rebound? April 15, 2002
'The real value in these technologies is when there is a change of process that goes
along with that,' Giga vice president Andrew Bartels told the E-Commerce Times.
$100M Acquisition Vaults E*Trade to Top Spot April 11, 2002
Just a few days ago, E*Trade competitor Ameritrade emerged as the winner of a heated
private auction to acquire Datek Online. E*Trade reportedly had bid on that company as
well.
Related News Alerts
More by Elaine X. Grant
The Double Standard of E-Commerce Service May 01, 2002
When a Web-only store does not adequately handle a complaint or question, there is no way
to ask for the manager.
Senate Set To Debate Online Privacy Bill April 25, 2002
According to the bill, the consent or non-consent of a user will remain in effect until
changed by that user, even if the company is acquired or files for bankruptcy.
HP Merger Trial Opens with Bitter Accusations April 24, 2002
HP CEO Carly Fiorina spent more than four hours on the stand, detailing how the company
planned to meet its goals and insisting that the company had done nothing untoward.