Steelscreen: Exploiting NEW Technology in and OLD Industry



Business-to-Business Exchanges

Jenny Arnold

Supree Mongrolcheep

Matthew Sheets

Melissa Sherer

April 29, 2004

Executive Summary:

Business to Business Exchanges

Business to Business exchanges (B2B) occur when two or more businesses come together to make a transaction. A B2B exchange includes the following three markets: suppliers → manufacturers → wholesalers. This paper concentrates on B2B e-commerce where buyers and sellers meet in an Internet marketplace designed to make the transaction process more efficient than the traditional methods of conducting business thru phone, fax, or email.

Size and Importance to Managers

Even though sources conflict on the actual size of spending conducted through B2B markets, all sources agree that B2B exchanges comprise the LARGEST market known to business. In 2001, one source, Gartner Group, stated that B2B spending was estimated to be $7,297,300,000,000 in 2004. In 2000, another source estimated that the market size would be $1.5 trillion. Whatever the difference in estimating the market, it is clear to all sources that B2B is five to ten times larger than B2C markets. Managers can benefit from B2B markets due to larger transaction values in both size and dollars. Also when compared to Business to Consumer (B2C) markets, 80% of all money poured into e-commerce goes to B2B exchanges.

Benefits

When B2B exchanges are operating efficiently, this market provides many benefits including:

• Reducing transaction costs

• A larger opportunity for transformation as a result of scale and scope

• Lowering purchasing costs for the buyer due to automation of paperwork

• Providing an Internet marketplace to connect buyers and sellers that would not have met using the traditional methods of doing business

Pitfalls

As discussed above, B2B exchanges deliver benefits when operated efficiently. However, on the flip side, when operated inefficiently, some roadblocks that B2B exchanges can experience include:

• Overcoming the habitual nature of people

• Money does not ensure success

• Prioritizing new features is not easy

• Launching at the right time is tricky

• Security is critical

• Tools for viewing and collaboration are essential

• Movement is toward private exchanges

Research Method

Initially, our research method included attending and interviewing a campus lecture given by Robert Skandalaris, founder, chairman, and CEO, of Noble International Ltd.. Unfortunately, the lecture was cancelled due to inclement weather. Since our group members did not work for a B2B company, we searched for B2B company case studies. This led us to the European Case Clearing House website where we found the case as well as a case referencing Covisint’s FTC investigation. Therefore, the main focus of this paper illustrates how three companies: , Covisint and WorldWide Retail Exchange, demonstrated the potential while starting up a B2B e-commerce company.

Summary of Overall Lessons and Findings

During the research process of B2B exchanges and thru the three case studies, we determined that the overall lessons are best demonstrated through the best practices of the B2B market. The following is a brief listing of the best practices:

• Products Exchanged

• Structure of Exchange

• Value-Added Services

• How Does the Exchange Derive a Profit

• What Role Do the Members play in the Management of the Exchange?

• Proposed Benefit for Buyer or Seller?

The paper will further compare the companies of (Steel industry), Covisint (Automobile industry), and WorldWide Retail Exchange (Retail, Food and Healthcare industry). Additionally, the best practices model illustrates that all three companies share similarities even though these companies are in diverse industries.

B2B exchanges:

B2B’s are the LARGEST markets known to business!

B2B exchanges offer digital transaction services that enhance eBusiness presentation making it safer and more secure.(5) The B2B marketplace is made up of websites that allow buyers and sellers to come together to communicate both vertically and horizontally, and they are able to bid, advertise, transact, and procure.(1) B2B can often be defined as:

• Selling to intermediaries rather than directly to the end customer

• Transactions involving fewer customers

• Smaller product ranges (9)

Spending

Numbers on B2B spending tend to vary by source. In 2002, the GDP of the U.S. was $10,480,800,000,000. While in 2004, B2B spending is estimated to be $7,297,300,000,000. The Gartner Group predicts the volume of e-commerce generated through B2Bs worldwide will grow to $7.29 trillion by 2004, a far cry from $145 billion in 1999. B2B exchanges are expected to facilitate nearly $2.71 trillion worth of B2B sales transactions in 2004, representing about 37 percent of the overall business-to-business market.(17)

[pic]

Why is B2B bigger?

As you will be able to see in our case studies that follow, B2Bs are large operations for some of the following reasons:

• The values of B2B transactions are bigger since the goods and services being created will pass through a lot of hands before they reach an end customer.

• Big transaction value, however, does not always make a difference in the bottom line.

• B2B derived efficiencies will be competed away by companies whose products and services are uninspired and undifferentiated. (10)

B2B versus B2C--B2B a bonanza B2C a bust

When B2B’s first startup their goal is to get as much value as they can out of the supply chain rather than trying to steal customers from their competitors. Of all the money poured into e-business, 80% goes to B2B. The main reason that B2C startups fail is often because they lack good business models, and they often do not receive the money that B2B exchanges receive.(10)

Transactions

B2B exchanges act as virtual marketplaces and make money through charging transaction fees to buyers and suppliers. On average these transaction fees are 4%. Online transactions make it easier for buyers and sellers to come together on the web:

• Certain exchanges allow businesses to find particular products or suppliers to agree to the terms of a transaction online (while the actual sale takes place offline)

• Others allow for complete transactions to take place online.(7)

Types of B2B exchanges

There are two types of B2B marketplaces through which these exchanges take place:

• Horizontal B2B exchanges serve a wide range of industries. Horizontal B2B marketplaces deal with the exchange of supplies that are common to many industries. Some examples of this could include computers or work clothes.

• Vertical B2B exchanges specialize in trading supplies in one particular industry. Some examples of industries that benefit from vertical exchanges would include petroleum or agriculture.(4)

Benefits of B2B Exchanges

Why are they useful???

When done correctly B2B exchanges can provide many benefits for their users, including the following:

• Cutting transaction costs—By allowing customers to download catalogs online and creating paperless purchase orders, companies can save valuable resources.

• Large opportunity for transformation because of scale and scope.

• Buyers are able to reduce purchasing costs due to automation of paperwork—saves valuable time.

• Online exchanges introduce buyers to suppliers they would not have traditionally met—allowing buyers and sellers to come together on the web.(7&9)

Benefits to Buyers

If a buyer is looking to get the lowest price, chances are they will prefer a B2B marketplace. However, if they want to develop a close relationship with a supplier because they are dealing with large orders that are critical to the core operations, they may prefer bilateral e-trade.

Benefits to Sellers

Sellers can maintain some control over their sales channels while minimizing service costs. However, this could mean that they lose their existing customers. Another benefit to a seller could be that they could customize products by taking over value added processing. (13)

Analyzing the B2B Market

Structure, Processes, and Groups

A market has three basic elements: a mechanism (info-structure) to support data exchange, a set of market processes, and a set of institutions to perform these market processes.

Info-structure is compared to the plumbing and wiring that support a building. Without these vital internal structures, the building would not exist. The same comparison can be made with info-structure and markets. Without information and the systems to gather, store, and redistribute; markets can not operate. The more efficient the structure, the more efficient the market. Info-structure can be broken down into physical infrastructure (computers, telephones, switches, and wiring) and intangible data.

Market processes are composed of five trade and five context processes.

Trade processes represent activities that buyers and sellers must accept before goods and services can be exchanged. The trade process is made up of the following activities:

• Search: Buyers and sellers must find each other.

• Authentication: Help participants verify each other’s trustworthiness prior to the transaction.

• Pricing: Negotiation of acceptable prices.

• Payment: The transfer of money between buyers and sellers.

• Logistics: Arranging the physical transfer of purchases made in the market.

Context processes are activities that support the trade process or help the process run more efficiently. The context process is made up of the following activities:

• Representation: Principles or agents acting on behalf of the buyers or sellers.

• Regulation: Ensuring that all transactions meet specified rules.

• Influence: Ensuring that the transactions are actually executed.

• Dispute Regulation: Adjudicating conflicts with participants of the transaction.

• Risk Management: Specialized insurance agencies that mitigate the effects of counterparty failure to uphold their half of the exchange.

Institutions can be described as “ecosystems”, made up of three groups – principals, agents, and supporting cast members.

1. Principals are the buyers and sellers. This group constitutes the participants involved in making the exchange.

2. Agents (brokers or traders) represent principals in one or more of the market processes.

3. Supporting cast members represent bankers, insurers, shippers, etc. They provide highly specialized context processes to the market.

In essence, the market is more than just a platform or a process. It is a web of personal and interpersonal relationships between principles, agents and the supporting cast members. (9)

The Future of B2B Exchanges

The future is never clear

In 2000, B2B exchanges were thought to be growing markets; however there were some doubts about the future. It was estimated that the market size would be $1.5 trillion in 2004; making it five to ten times larger than estimated B2C markets. In 2003, it was estimated that more than half of B2B trade will take place through eBusiness networks or eMarketplaces. (5) All of the sources that were researched gave conflicting estimates for the B2B exchanges. However, the bottom line and main takeaway is that the B2B market is much BIGGER than the B2C market.

Why are B2B Exchanges Struggling?

The main goal of B2B services should be to bring buyers and sellers together using the Internet as a tool. However, some B2B exchanges are failing due to the following reasons:

• People are creatures of habit. People are used to their familiar ways of conducting business thru telephone, fax and email. Therefore, it can be difficult to convince these individuals to change their habits and use the Internet to conduct business transactions.

• Money does not ensure success. Even if a company spends money to build a good environment for a B2B exchange, they are still not guaranteed to earn the money back. Money is important, but it is not the only factor in determining success. Factors such as employees and business plans must be used in conjunction with one another to achieve success.

• Prioritizing new features is not easy. Defining new features is not challenging, however, prioritizing and communicating these new features to the Web development team can cause difficulties.

• Launching at the right time is tricky. Timing is everything.

• Security is critical. In a world of information, data security is important when doing business.

• Tools for viewing and collaboration are essential. Information today has become increasingly more complicated making it a necessity for B2B exchanges to establish tools that simplify processes.

• Movement is toward private exchanges. The private exchange is stealing the spotlight from public exchanges by providing companies value-added alternatives that help meet specific needs. (16)

Evaluating B2B Best Practices:

Over the last 80 years, products and businesses of great diversification have experienced the same general market life cycle. In an entity’s beginning stages, R&D costs are high, profits are low and economies of scale are few. With low barriers to entry, competition floods the marketplace and throws an industry into chaos. While some market participants prosper, many have flawed business models and fail in the industry.

Statistics show that B2B exchanges are no exception. Before competitive turbulence shook free nearly 90% of the market participants, there were over 1500 B2B exchanges. Now there are less than 200. (14) Why? What made over 1300 firms extinct? What are the 200 firms doing right? The following are some best practices we developed to help differentiate the successful business models from the lemons:

• Products Exchanged – raw materials like steel and timber can entice participation through lower costs. General products like paperclips and office furniture also are attractive at bulk prices. Items like diamonds, Van Goghs, and small-arm NATO weapons are not ideal for B2B internet exchanges.

• Structure of Exchange – is the exchange public or private? Private exchanges are generally formed by participating members for the benefit of the participating members. Publicly-traded exchanges are formed to maximize the wealth of the shareholders, whom may or may not be participating members.

• Value-Added Services – the competition is intense enough without having to combat a potential client’s traditional methods of B2B interaction. Value-added services not only provide a leg up on the competition, but help to persuade business away from fax machines, telephones and notepads.

• How Does the Exchange Derive a Profit – the two most common practices for generating revenues are transaction commissions and annual fees. Commissions seem to properly align an exchange with the participants. Annual fees help to entrench participants, but do not have the total dollar potential that commissions enjoy. Ultimately, if you are not profitable, you are living on borrowed time.

• What Role Do the Members play in the Management of the Exchange? – When the members have a say, their best interests are represented. An active management role by the members of an exchange is a good sign the exchange is private.

• Proposed Benefit for Buyer or Seller? – This is a trick question. Successful exchanges must provide value for both sides, especially since they are also engaged in the greater fight against the ‘old’ way of conducting business.

Now that some best practices have been set forth, let’s see what they reveal about three B2B exchanges in particular. We chose 3 companies to perform case studies on; companies that were diverse with respect to goods traded and member characteristics. The three companies selected for study were the WorldWide Retail Exchange, Covisint, and .

WorldWide Retail Exchange:

The Premiere Internet-based B2B Exchange in the Retail e-Marketplace

In March of 2000, 17 international retailers pooled $100 million of capital into an Internet-based B2B exchange to improve supply chain processes both vertically and horizontally. The WorldWide Retail Exchange, or WWRE, facilitates the exchange located at . Trading is done in the form of online auctions, where products are listed and bid on for a specified amount of time (usually days). Some benefits of using the WWRE include the following:

• The retailers envisioned an Internet marketplace, where goods could be efficiently obtained, and surpluses could be quickly unloaded.

• Perishable items would be routed quicker through automation, allowing reduced costs for consumers and less spoiled product for the retailer.

• A worldwide network of suppliers would give the retailers access to new markets.

At the time, this group of retailers boasted of over $300 billion in annual sales. If it is agreeable to say that the average company’s IT budget is 5% of revenues, then the combined annual IT budget of these 17 companies would have been around $15 billion. Ironically, although $100 million seems like high initial startup costs, this sum represented only 0.67% of the founding member’s annual IT budget. This illustrates how massive these companies are and more importantly that only a small number were required to give the inexperienced exchange its required inertia. Consider that the combined economic output of these 17 retailers was roughly equivalent to the GDP of Russia in 2002! (21)

Value Proposition

Digital Economies of Scale with a Global reach

In the past, companies had to purchase their own IT assets and manage them. Outsourcing was an unproven commodity and companies lacked the experience needed to properly plan for future IT needs. With the WWRE, companies can leverage expert knowledge and retain a needed degree of control through:

1. Cost efficient products that grow with your business allow for collaboration between members and are helpdesk supported.

2. Shared technology investments and outsourced assets allow for a “whole is greater than the parts” advantage. Although a company may have invested several million in the WWRE, they get access to several hundred million of IT assets.

3. Access to a global membership community and the ability to network with other retailers/manufacturers. More sellers mean cheaper prices for buyers. Free access to a proven market means sellers can increase their exposure to the WWRE risk-free.

Although initially founded by large retailers like Albertson’s, Kmart, Marks & Spencer, and CVS Pharmacy, the exchange has grown today to include pharmaceutical manufacturers such as GlaxoSmithKline, Wyeth, and Schering-Plough. The WWRE has proven useful at not only helping retailers cut costs on goods they stock their stores with, but also at combining demand across users to lower costs on back office supplies like furniture, light bulbs and pencils. Today, there are 64 members of the WWRE and over 100,000 suppliers. These 64 members employ over 5,000,000 workers in over 130 countries. With $900 billion in annual sales, this group is the 8th largest country in the world in terms of GDP. (21)

Founding Principles

You Say Jump, the WWRE says, “How High?”

The WWRE depends on the success of the members for continued business. Since the WWRE and its members (who are also equity owners) have a symbiotic relationship, what affects one will affect the other. This is how the WWRE intends to maintain the momentum:

1. Openness – since the founding members had an equity position, it would be more difficult to walk away. Therefore, it was crucial that dealings between the exchange and the members be transparent. The exchange was created to benefit the members, so it must be able to adjust to the member’s changing needs.

2. Commitment to Utilizing the Best Available Technology – this also means knowing when to outsource a non-core function when an appropriate alternative is found. When selecting outsourcing partners, the WWRE conducts a financial assessment and a technology review. WWRE members are actively involved in this process.

3. Operation as a Neutral Company – this allows the WWRE to focus on its member’s best interests alone. In theory, our federal government is supposed to do this also, but that is another paper for another day.

So far, the WWRE has saved member companies over $1 billion to date. This is more than the market capitalization of over 1600 of the 2000 companies that comprise the Russell 2000 index. A billion dollars is roughly equivalent to the entire ASP market! At this point an overview is in order of the utilities that have proved so useful. (21)

Four Featured Exchanges and Value-Added Services

The Nuts & Bolts of the Enterprise

The two exchanges that WWRE operates are the Surplus Goods Exchange (horizontally integrated) and the Perishable Goods Exchange (vertically integrated). These exchanges comprise the major profit centers of the WWRE. The Demand Aggregation and Asset Manager make up their value-added services. Both Suppliers and Retailers benefit from the value-added services, increasing the attractiveness of this exchange for all potential participants.

Surplus Goods Exchange (SGE)

Try as they might, businesses invariably end up with surpluses from time to time. Surpluses can be caused by incorrect forecasts, ineffective promotions, discontinued items, closeouts, seasonal variances and labeling changes to name a few. Whatever the cause of the surplus may be, traditional methods have been inefficient and economically unattractive. The WWRE partnered with Visagent Corporation in 2001 to develop and host the auction site. In the member’s eyes, the SGE has all but replaced conventional intermediaries by allowing buyers and sellers to pocket the normal middle-man markup and more importantly, quickly turn non-performing assets into cash.

When faced with a surplus, the seller has the ability to combine surplus products with other sellers, allowing for a quicker bulk transaction rather than liquidation via several small trades. Never content with leaving well enough alone, the WWRE also allows sellers to control the types of buying groups that see a particular auction to ensure that products are matched to their potential buying groups.

The trade screen below for the Surplus Goods Exchange is simple and straightforward. This helps to ensure that problems do not arise later once an auction has closed. Using the SGE is up to 70-80% less expensive than other liquidation alternatives. Additionally, sellers do not pay to use the exchange; rather the buyer pays a small fee plus transportation. Members of the WWRE pay 2.5%; other buyers pay 3.5%. This is done to encourage membership. (21)

[pic]

Perishable Goods Exchange (PGE)

Before the WWRE and Agribuys teamed up to launch the PGE in April of 2001, grocers had long complained about inefficient procurement practices. Over 70 cents of every sales dollar in the fresh foods industry is spent on buying, shipping and storage. This figure is higher of course since some of the purchased product never makes it to the grocer’s shelves due to spoilage. By streamlining the fresh foods supply chain, grocers are able to reduce shipping and acquisition costs by eliminating the wholesaler, buying from the producer and contracting for the shipping at the point of purchase.

Members of the exchange can also combine partial truckloads of goods to save money on transportation. This benefits the trucking companies by allowing them to plan their routes and fleet deployment further in advance. Because delivery times are reduced, grocers lose fewer products to spoilage and are able to reduce inventories. It is important to note that even if prices of the perishable goods on the PGE were the same as prices through conventional channels, the reduced shipping and cost savings associated with that aspect alone make the PGE too compelling to ignore. Along the same line, purchased products can be tracked by the buyer from the seller’s warehouse to the buyer’s store. If a problem occurs, it can be handled in real-time, while contingencies may still exist. In the past, it could take days to find out that there was a problem with a delivery. (21) The illustration below accentuates the mutual collaboration between parties that is possible because of the Perishable Goods Exchange:

[pic]

Demand Aggregation

One of the value-added services offered by the WorldWide Retail Exchange is the Demand Aggregation suite. As is the recurring theme in this class, the more of a train wreck a firm’s current buying structure is, the more useful this product will be. First of all, this offers businesses with several buyers the ability to consolidate buying activities in a central location. Secondly, demand for goods can be combined with other firms’ demand in order to leverage even greater economies of purchasing scale.

Benefits to Buyers

• Reductions in Transaction Costs – with a central buyer, fewer transactions are needed.

A central buyer also helps to curb maverick spending.

• Reduction of Time Required to Participate in Collaborative Activities – several firm’s central buyers can collaborate. This reduces redundancy and saves time since fewer people are involved in the aggregation process.

• Budgeting Tools – templates for projects can be created and managed to determine how actual spending relates to the forecasted amount.

Benefits to Sellers

• Improved Customer Response Time – by operating on the same platform as your buyers, communication is streamlined resulting in better service.

• Eliminate the Need for Outdated Paper Catalogs – whenever information changes, suppliers can update product descriptions within seconds as opposed to waiting for the last Friday of the month. (21)

Asset Manager

Through this value-added service, organizations can store, share and organize digital assets. This is important when being the first company to market with a new product can mean the difference between success and failure. Because these stored media assets can be quickly sent to suppliers on the WWRE platform, total time to market is drastically reduced. Even if a new product is not being developed, both suppliers and retailers benefit from improved communications and the ability to efficiently share media. (21)

Best Practices

To wrap up the Worldwide Retail Exchange, let’s see how the company measures up to our best practices. The WWRE is privately held; owned by the exchange’s members and governed by a board made up of member firm employees. The firm trades general products as well as perishable products. Having said that, the WWRE exists to remove inefficiencies in the supply chain, not create wild short-term profit opportunities. This should keep the interests of the exchange aligned with the needs of the members. It is apparent that the exchange benefits both buyers and sellers, given the large amount of volume the WWRE is beginning to experience. The WWRE derives income from membership fees and commissions. Although annual fees are nice to have, the real future of this company should be tied to commission revenues. Last but not least, although the competition has similar value-added services, companies that can continue to roll out new services over time can consider those services to be a competitive advantage.

| |World Wide Retail Exchange |

|Industry |Retail, Food, Healthcare |

|Products Exchanged |Mostly General |

|Private or Public |Private |

|Proposed Benefit |Buyer & Seller |

|Value-added Services |Asset Management & Demand Aggregation |

|Profit Sources |Fees and Commissions |

|Member’s Role in Management of the exchange |Equity Stakes and Governing Board |

Covisint:

The World’s LARGEST B2B

[pic] [pic] [pic] [pic]

Covisint is a technology company that connects the global automotive industry using business-to business applications and communication services. Covisint is a worldwide organization that works to implement common processes for the entire industry by working with manufacturers, suppliers, and industry trade groups. Once a member of Covisint, companies can reduce costs, enhance quality, increase efficiency, and improve time to market.

History

• On February 25, 2000, Daimler-Chrysler, Ford, General Motors and Renault-Nissan formed Covisint.

• On January 1, 2001, Covisint officially began business in the United States, and in July of that year they began in Europe, Asia-Pacific, and Latin America.

• Covisint’s U.S. headquarters are located in Southfield, Michigan. They have offices in Amsterdam, Tokyo, Frankfurt, Paris, and Rio DeJanero. (18)

It should be noted that it is very difficult to find out details about Covisint as it is owned by the automakers and is not a publicly held company. Therefore they are not required to reveal their revenue figures.

Size

• 25,000 registered customer organizations (this number is comprised of all of Covisint’s suppliers and buyers in their user base)

• 135,000 active users from these registered customer organizations

• Provides services in over 96 countries (18)

The Business Plan

When the company was first formed in 2000, it’s plan included making it quicker and easier for car companies to gather bids from around the world and close the best deal just by explaining exactly what it is that they wanted to buy. The new company was basically going to be an Internet auction site where they could buy anything from steering wheels and engine components to toilet paper. It was basically to be a one-stop shop for anything that an automaker would need in order to do business. (6)

Why Form Covisint?

• Supply chain for the automotive industry is very disconnected and therefore the flow of information is often constricted.

• Another very important reason for Covisint is that along points of the value chain there are information gaps which cause expensive inefficiencies and unsatisfied customers.

These information gaps cost the industry gigantic amounts including:

• $6-8 billion in processing and managing quality processes

• $2-3 billion administering warranties

• Asset utilization is less than 50 percent

• 30 days are wasted responding to each quote

• $3-4 billion in obsolete inventory due to lack of communication in design changes

• 15 percent of all tooling is obsolete before it is ever used

• Due to just-in-time pressures and premiums, freight transportation costs are three times higher in the automotive industry

• 25 percent of platform development times are lost due to duplication of work and long wait times for responses (18)

The Solution

Covisint felt that the logical solution was to use the Internet to connect, communicate, and collaborate with customers and suppliers.

[pic]

Covisint Communicate

Covisint Communicate is a portal that works with suppliers to provide access to the information they need in order to work with the customer. This allows for industry participants to access buyer and supplier applications through one common place that was built through the input of suppliers and OEM customers. It allows for companies to create a strong presence when they become a trading partner, which can allow them to better communicate with the supply chain. Covisint communicate is easy to use for trading partners through one easy password. (18)

The following is an example of a Trading Partners Page.

[pic]

Covisint Connect

Covisint Connect is a single connection provided through a data messaging service for the exchange of data between a company’s current enterprise applications and their supplier’s applications. A business should be able to benefit from the ability to launch new business processes quickly. By using Covisint Connect there should be value created for both the customers and their suppliers. (18)

[pic]

Covisint Collaborate

As mentioned earlier, Covisint Collaborate resembles a helpdesk, which can allow for more efficient services to solve emerging business problems through third party applications, enterprise solutions, cross-enterprise supply chain applications, and customer relationship management (CRM). Covisint has also set up three phases to allow suppliers to connect effectively and efficiently:

• Project Goal and Scope of Work: Understanding project goals and business objectives of the customer.

• Supplier Rationalization and Prioritization: Working with individual companies to provide timely and accurate information.

• Supplier Recruitment and Status Reporting: Covisint provided applications that are licensed to each supplier with an individual contract. (18)

FTC Investigation

Anti-trust implications for Covisint spark debate for all B2B exchanges

In July 2000, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) launched an investigation into Covisint. The FTC explored possible anti-trust infractions by looking at Covisint’s structure and mission. Covisint’s online exchange could raise anti-trust concerns since their founders represented a large share of the automotive market. Therefore, the FTC wanted to make sure that the arrangements would not allow for the big automakers to collude in order to drive down prices. There was also concern that sensitive information could be passed along about competitors or that small businesses might be excluded from the market. (3)

Antitrust Compliance Policy

In response to the FTC’s investigation Covisint issued the Antitrust Compliance Policy which set down strict guidelines that everyone in the organization must follow. The following is an excerpt from the policy:

“The fundamental objective of the antitrust laws is to protect and promote free and fair competition. These laws reflect the belief that competitive markets will provide consumers with the highest quality goods and services at the lowest prices and enable the most innovative and efficient firms to thrive. Covisint supports the public policies embodied in these laws and it is the company’s policy to comply fully with them.” (19)

The policy set up the following consequences for anyone who did not follow the policy:

• Any individual that was convicted of a violation could face up to three years in jail and a fine of up to $350,000.

• Any employee who did not comply was subject to discipline, which could include a demotion or dismissal.

• Management was held responsible for employees reporting to them and could face disciplinary action against them.

The Outcome

On September 11, 2000 Covisint was cleared of any charges by the FTC since it was found to be open to participation of all suppliers and it would not be the only place through which automakers purchased parts. Also since Covisint did not start providing service in the United States until January 2001 they were not considered to be in business at the time of the investigation, however they were going to be closely monitored since in the future there could be concerns about how they were going to do business. (3)

Since Covisint was the first B2B exchange to be reviewed by the FTC, a large debate was started about how or whether the B2B industry should be regulated by anti-trust provisions. FTC chairman, Robert Pitofsky, stated the following about how B2B exchanges would be monitored:

“The antitrust analysis of an individual business-to-business exchange will be specific to its mission, its structure, its particular market circumstance procedures and rules for organization and operation, and actual operations and market performance.” (3)

Recent Issues

Will Covisint Survive?????

When Covisint began, it was predicted that it would become the biggest Internet company in the world by assisting the automotive industry and it’s suppliers to buy and sell an estimated $240 billion in car parts every year. According to an article Covisint hits rough patch as business falling flat, it was noted that there had been bogus auctions that made suppliers reluctant to sell their products through Covisint. Therefore, many suppliers only used Covisint when customers demanded it and very few now use it for their own purchases. As a result of this Covisint had approximately $70 million in annual revenues in 2002 when it had hoped to have $150 million in revenues. (11)

As a result of these problems Covisint signed an agreement in December 2003 with Freemarkets, Inc. a global supply management solutions (GSM) to acquire sourcing and service assets. This means that Covisint will transfer all of its customer contracts for auction services over to Freemarkets which will now be positioned as the premier provider of sourcing technologies and services to the automotive industry as a result of this agreement. Under long-term contracts, Freemarkets will serve Ford, General Motors, and Daimler Chrysler using its own sourcing and technology services. They will also provide solutions to OEMs such as Nissan, Mitsubishi, and other Covisint customers.

The following is a quote from Bob Paul, CEO of Covisint about the deal with Freemarkets:

“Covisint has had a very successful year in which we more than doubled our user base. The sale of our auction services to Freemarkets is a logical and evolutionary step as we continue to focus our strategy on the Automotive Industry Operating System and delivering supplier management portals and data messaging services.” (8)

Best Practices

Covisint is a B2B exchange in the automotive industry where products specific to the automobile industry are traded. Covisint is a privately held company that was formed by the three automakers and set up to benefit both buyers and sellers. In the past they have derived their revenues through commissions made on sales. However, they are now going to a system of charging members an annual fee and then members will be allowed to participate in as many auctions throughout the year as they wish. The members of Covisint have a very active role in management of the exchange as they sit on the Board of Directors.

|  |Covisint |

|Industry |Auto |

|Products Exchanged |Specific |

|Private & Public |Private |

|Proposed Benefit |Buyer & Seller |

|Value-added Services |Connect, Communicate, & Collaborate |

|Profit Source(s) |Commissions |

|Member’s Role in Management of the Exchange |Members sit as Board of Directors |

Steelscreen:

Exploiting NEW Technology in and OLD Industry

The following excerpt may help individuals not in the steel industry understand just how difficult it was for Steelscreen to undertake a new technology in such an old industry:

Imagine you have been dating someone for years. The relationship is blossoming, but one day your sweetie informs you that instead of calling, you should communicate by email. And if you want to get together, you should arrange that through an online dating service, where you will competing with other suitors. That, in essence, is the message that suppliers of everything from paperclips to maintenance services got a couple of years ago when manufacturers eager to business-to-business, or B2B, exchanges on the Internet, says Laird Harrison, Time Magazine writer. (12)

This was the issue that Steelscreen faced when implementing an online exchange marketplace for its suppliers and buyers to exchange goods. However, Steelscreen knew that in the end, the new technology would allow many more exchanges to occur between buyers and sellers.

The Founding Fathers

Extensive Knowledge in the Metal Industry

Steelscreen was founded in 1999 by a group of European metals and telecom industries. The following pictures are the individuals responsible for the birth of Steelscreen and are still part of Steelscreen’s management team:

[pic] [pic] [pic] [pic]

Anders Candell David Schelin Fredrik Ohrn Peter Anderberg

Technical Manager CEO Financial Manager Marketing Manager

One of Steelscreen’s customers, Mario Vergna, Commercial Director of ILTA INOX, stated, “Steelscreen’s founders have an extensive knowledge on the metal business, which guarantees the marketplace really fulfills the needs of the European companies.” (15)

Proposition & Goals

Launching the World’s 1st Industry Standard for On-line Metal Trading

Steelscreen’s proposition is to offer a meeting point (marketplace) for buyers and sellers of the metal industry to communicate more efficiently. Steelscreen will never participate as an agent or trader, only to provide the meeting point for buyers and sellers.

Steelscreen’s goals include:

• Become the leading marketplace for metal products in the European market

• Make the purchase and sale of the metal products simpler and more efficient by offering a neutral marketplace

• Offer value-added services such as: financial service, logistic and transport quality, product inspection, etc. (15)

E-Commerce Trading Models

Third-Generation Trading Model—Neutral to Both Sides

Steelscreen operates under a third-generation trading model which offers a neutral position (M=Marketplace) to both suppliers (S) and buyers (B).

The benefits for the Third Generation Model exist for both the buyer and seller. They are as follows:

Suppliers:

• Sell products with lowering operating costs

• Needs satisfied

• Transactions processed faster

• Gain competitive advantage

• Reaches most users

• Does not require large IT investments

Buyers:

• Simplified negotiation process

• Needs satisfied

This model has NO great disadvantages to either the buyer or supplier making it a more efficient model than previous models that benefited the buyer or seller but not both parties. (15)

$$$$$ Revenue Model $$$$$

Sales Commission on Transaction Value

Since Steelscreen does not act as a buyer or seller in the marketplace, they needed to generate revenue through another source. Steelscreen opted to charge a sales commission of 0.5 to 1% of the transaction value. When compared to the e-commerce sales commission average of 4%, Steelscreen’s commission was considerably low. Also, Steelscreen did not participate in the exchange of money; therefore, the money is handled directly between buyer and seller. No fee was charged to the purchasing party. Hence, the selling party was held responsible for the sales commission on the transaction. Steelscreen also viewed the value-added services as a future source of revenue. Since Steelscreen is a privately held corporation, the revenue figures are not publicly made available. (15)

Types of Members

By spring 2000, more than 700 members

Obviously, when a transaction of a product occurs, a buyer and seller must be involved. Steelscreen has four different member options available. When a company registers to become a member of Steelscreen, the company must select which type of member it wishes to be considered. The four types of members include: Selling Member, Buying Member, Buying and Selling Member (wholesalers), and Associated Member.

Founded in July 1999, Steelscreen actually started trading on the World Wide Web in the spring of 2000. By the end of August that same year, more than 700 members had joined the marketplace and significant “tonnage volumes” of product had been traded. (15)

Why be a member?

Time Saving, Cheaper, Secure……

What are the benefits of being a Steelscreen member? What advantages will my company have over other companies? These were many questions that companies raised when Steelscreen first launched their on-line trading marketplace. As the beginning of this case study implied, changing the technology and way of doing business for such an old industry was the main challenge that Steelscreen faced in the beginning.

Steelscreen established a list of most important reasons stating why a member should use the Steelscreen marketplace:

1. Cheaper: The commission selling members paid on the transaction value was much less than the industry charged

2. Faster: Information about products is distributed to all potential business partners

3. Simpler: Inquiries and offers more specified

4. More efficient: Reach all members at once

5. Time Saving: Members only spend time with rewarding contacts

6. Up-to-date: Facts, trends and analysis

7. Comprehensive: Growing number of value-added services

8. Independent: Neutral to both parties

9. European: Adapted to standards and available in many languages

10. Secure: Maximum security (15)

Mario Vergna gave his thoughts about being a member of Steelscreen,

“Trading on Steelscreen gives us several major advantages. The most important benefit is the ability to find, evaluate and select the right business partner. This helps us avoid risk. In addition, our goal is to save time and money and make our trading process more efficient.” (20)

The Exchange

By 2005, 40-60% of all metal produced will be sold via the internet. (15)

Any metal product is tradable. The more standardized the metal, the easier it will be for the member to use the system. Steelscreen is an Internet Marketplace providing buyers and sellers the more efficient market channel. Anderson Consulting has projected that 40-60% of all metal produced in the world will be sold via internet by 2005.

The following represent the suppliers and buyers exchange screens. The screens will help further explain the trading process between buyer and supplier.

Buyer’s Area

How to send an Inquiry

The buyer will select a product and complete the inquiry details such as quantity, dates, delivery address, etc. Then the buyer will select the suppliers that it wishes to send the inquiry to. The inquiry is now ready to be sent to the supplier. The exchange screen is displayed below. (20)

[pic]

Supplier’s Area

Replying to an Inquiry

Inquires appear automatically in the Supplier area. The Supplier will create an offer and fill in the offer details such as quantity, price and delivery date. The final step is to send the offer. (20)

[pic]

Supplier’s Area

How to send a spot item

The Supplier selects the product and fills in the spot item details of the sale. Then the Supplier selects and sends the spot item to the buyers it wishes to contact. (20)

[pic]

Buyer’s Area

Replying to a Spot Item

The Buyer receives the spot item and must decide to order or decline. If the buyer decides to order, it must fill in the details, click Bid/Accept Offer and confirm the order with a password. (20)

[pic]

Standardizing Members’ Needs

Steelscreen offers a complete database of standards and alloy information. A member can search the database specifically by designation, chemical composition and mechanical properties. Steelscreen’s marketplace is more efficient due to the members’ ability to create their own standards and alloys and by defining specific characteristics. Essentially the database helps members save time, find products that suit their needs, and customize products to meet specific characteristics. (15)

Best Practices

Measuring up……

The Steelscreen case study can be summed up by relating it to the best practices. Of course, it is obvious that Steelscreen operates in the steel industry which is a very specific industry. Our group tried to enter in a “fake” membership application and our application was never accepted. Steelscreen takes its marketplace very seriously making it a very private company. Both the buyer and seller benefit from the exchange. The sales commission on transactions currently generates the revenue but Steelscreen hopes that revenues from value-added services will ramp up soon as well. Unlike Covisint and World Wide Retail Exchange where the members play a role in management, Steelscreen’s members do not participate in the role of management. The members and transactions are kept separate from management. Steelscreen never participates in the exchange. However this does not put Steelscreen at a disadvantage, Steelscreen’s management team has extensive knowledge in the metal industry.

| |Steelscreen |

|Industry |Steel |

|Product Exchanged |Specific |

|Private & Public |Private |

|Proposed Benefit |Buyer & Seller |

|Value-added Services |Financial Services, Transport Quality, Product Inspection and |

| |Logistics |

|Profit Source(s) |Commissions on Transactions |

| |Value-added Services |

|Member’s Role in Management of the exchange |None |

Conclusion:

Comparing 3 different B2B Industries

By comparing the companies of (Steel industry), Covisint (Automobile industry), and WorldWide Retail Exchange (Retail, Food and Healthcare industry), the best practices model illustrates that all three companies share similarities even though these companies are in diverse industries.

All three companies are privately held, making it very difficult to gain access and obtain company information. This is illustrated by the fact that Covisint’s and Steelscreen’s management teams would not even return our emails or phone calls! Furthermore, Covisint is so private that a company can be a member by invitation only! We tried to register as a fictious member on but were never granted access to join the marketplace because we were not affiliated with the steel industry. Another similarity of the three cases includes benefiting both the buyers and sellers, which allows for a larger and more efficient marketplace. Value-added services are created to differentiate a company from other competitors in a given industry. Therefore, the value-added services are different for each of the three companies that were researched. As the paper stated earlier, the majority of B2B companies generate revenue from fees and commissions; our cases directly illustrate this point. The final component of the best practice model, members’ role in management, exemplifies the diversification among these three companies. Covisint demonstrates the highest level of member involvement with members sitting as Board of Directors. WorldWide Retail Exchange shows the second highest level of involvement with members having equity stakes in the company and participating on a Governing Board. On the opposite end, Steelscreen’s members do not have a role in management, as management does not participate in transactions on the marketplace. Therefore, Steelscreen’s members and management team have separate roles and never overlap in the business processes. These case studies have shown that technology should not be acquired for technology’s sake. If technology can not be made useful, then money is wasted, and cost savings are not realized. Many failed B2B exchanges simply thought they would toss a pile of money at technology and wait for the profits to roll in. As with other industries and products, time has shown that technology is only an enabler, and a business model that successfully integrates technology is needed for an enterprise to succeed.

The table below illustrates the similarities and differences between these very diverse industries and the best practices model that was formulated during this research process.

[pic]

Works Cited

1. “An Outlook on B2B Commerce.” article on July 5, 2000 on , viewed on March 11, 2004.

2. Angel, Robert. “A new dawn for CRM: This time it’s B2B.” Ivey Business Journal Online (2003): pp.1 ABI/INFORM Global. Proquest. University of Missouri St. Louis. 17 February 2004.

3. “Anti-Trust and Competitive Issues in B2B Trading Exchanges: Covisint Inc.” Centre for Asian Business Cases, European Case Clearinghouse, 12 July 2002.

4. “B2B for beginners-Definition and Applications. What exactly is Business to Business?” article on gcis.ca/B2B_beginners.html, viewed February 29, 2004.

5. “B2B Terminology.” article on thelibrary/b2bterminology.html, viewed on February 26, 2004.

6. Butters, Jamie and Jeff Bennett. “Covisint hits rough patch as business falling flat.” article December 9, 2002 on , viewed March 28, 2004.

7. Campanelli, Melissa. “Trading Places (business to business exchange).” Entrepreneur, November 2000.

8. “Freemarkets to sign Agreement to Acquire Covisint Auction Services.” , viewed March 28, 2004.

9. Friesen, G. Bruce. “From B2B to…?” Consulting to Management 14.4 (2003): pp.27-33 ABI/INFORM Global. Proquest. University of Missouri St. Louis. 17 February 2004.

10. Hamel, Gary. “SPECIAL REPORT: Is this all you build with the net? Think bigger enough of this B2B talk. Use the net to construct a unique company. How? Ask your customers.” Fortune Magazine, 17 April 2001.

11. Hamm, Steve. “B2B Isn’t Dead. It’s Learning.” Business Week, 18 December 2002.

12. Harrison, Laird. “B2B Survivors” Time Magazine, 24 December 2001.

13. “Practical Guide to Selling Efficiently on any B2B Exchange.” article November 26, 2003 on gcis.ca/b2b_sellers_guide.html, viewed February 19, 2004.

14. “SPECIAL REPORT: Online Shopping: B2B, Take 2.” Business Week, 25 November 2003.

15. Subirana, Brian. “: Challenging and Aligning Technology and Strategy in B2B.” The European Case Clearing House, March 2002.

16. Wohlers, Terry. “Internet Editorial: E-Commerce: The Challenges of Creating a B2B Exchange.” Rapid Prototyping Journal 7.2(2001): pp.122-123. ABI/INFORM Global. Proquest. University of Missouri St. Louis. 4 March 2004.

17. cba.hawaii.edu/aspy/aspymkfa.htm, viewed March 11, 2004.

18. , viewed February 26 and March 28, 2004.

19. legal_Pub/antitrust.html, viewed February 26, 2004.

20. , viewed April 2, 2004.

21. , viewed March 28, 2004.

-----------------------

B

B

B

M

S

S

S

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download