5 behaviors Corporate Venture Capital practitioners should take to heart

Storm trooper

Photo credit: JD Hancock

Corporate Venture Capital is growing and 2015 will probably be the biggest year since 2001!

50(!) new Corporate Venture Capital groups have made their first investment during the first eight months of 2015 according to CB Insight.

NVCA reports that in the first half of 2015 Corporate Venture Capital groups have invested $4 billion into US based Start-ups across 431 deals. That means that almost 20% of all deals had a Corporate VC involved. For more stats and thoughts from NVCA, see president Bobby Franklin’s post.

Corporate Venture Capital growth means that more people are getting into the profession. Being an active CVC the last five years and having discussed best practice with many entrepreneurs and CVC colleagues over the years I wanted to share a couple of behaviors that I believe are important to be successful.

  1. Treat entrepreneurs as your most valued resource – which they are

This should be a given, however I’m not sure it’s always the case. The entrepreneurs we invest in are without competition the factor that will make or break the success of us as a CVC. Unless you develop a trusting relationship they won’t share knowledge, spend time on working out deals with the mother company and so on. Getting access and investing in the best entrepreneurs is obviously a crucial and non-trivial part of a great CVC and reputation travels very fast in the small relationship driven Venture industry. A key part of treating them right is being careful with their time. It takes time to learn what activities between portfolio companies and the mother company that creates value. Make sure that the activities are constantly evaluated from a value vs time perspective and don’t push portfolio companies into joint activities that isn’t in their best interest. It is sometimes necessary for the portfolio company to help us convince internal stakeholders during diligence and for new rounds. That’s a part of the game, just be clear with the reason and what’s expected.
If you’re Portfolio Company CEOs don’t give you good reviews – you’re pretty much doomed.

  1. Keep focus on the external world and avoid getting trapped in endless internal meetings

It is easy to spend way too much time on internal meetings and hard to know what really is important. My rule is that unless there is a clear possibility for a new investment or a partnership with an existing company I try to avoid getting involved. I really think this is in the best interest of the mother company since our unique value add is bringing the power of external entrepreneurship to the company, not be internal consultants/PowerPoint creators.

  1. Don’t meddle with Portfolio company strategy

The debate about whether VCs in general add net value or not is interesting and needed. The amount of detailed knowledge needed to advice on general business strategy is really high and since board members/observers don’t think about the business 24/7 it is unlikely that they can point the company in the strategic right direction. This is particularly dangerous with CVC’s because they have industry specific experience and clout, however those experiences most often come from the large company perspective and often translate poorly to the Start-up world. If you as a Start-up use industry best practice you will most likely not win, Start-ups need to compete in new ways. That’s also what makes them attractive to Big companies.


  1. Contribute with industry specific information, introductions and credibility

Providing tangible things like industry research and facts, introductions within the value chain  and credibility through association on the other hand can be highly valuable. Focus on providing these things rather than getting in to the trap of general business advice is hard but so important. Having a Fortune 500 company logo on your business card open doors that are much harder for entrepreneurs to open. Utilize this fact without shame and help the entrepreneurs to get a foot in the door. Have the confidence to stay quiet during general business strategy discussions, (which is really really hard), or ask probing questions that help them reflect. I am sure that many CVC practitioners could add significant value to portfolio company strategy but it is easy to get wrong and will take a lot of time. It is simply not a good way to spend time for a CVC. Advice that isn’t well thought through can, especially for a first time CEO, have disastrous effects.

  1. Do everything you can to make high potential collaborations between your portfolio companies and the mother company successful

It is HARD to get momentum for significant collaborations between portfolio companies and the mother company. Many times it sounds good on a high level during the diligence process but once you get down to the detailed level and actions it rapidly becomes complex. When you finally get traction in both organizations for a joint project with significant potential – work relentlessly to break down barriers that doesn’t have to do with the fundamentals of the deal itself. The classical example is a reorganization within the Mother company that suddenly makes the key people driving the project disappear and a new team needs to be brought up to speed. This is a situation where a CVC really can make a huge difference in getting the new Executives up to speed. Provide that continuity between the organizations. At the same time, don’t push collaborations that don’t make sense for both companies from a financial perspective, in order to understand this we believe that you need to be deeply involved but not controlling. It is a delicate difficult balance but when it works the results will be collaborations that drives themselves and create significant value for both companies. Similar to Venture return in general we have found that there are a few portfolio companies that create almost all strategic benefits – that is why nurturing and fighting for those potential partnerships is so important.

Looking forward to hear your thoughts!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Transportation Venture Capital is booming – US and China dominate

I’m on my way to Techstars Mobility’s first Demo day in Motor City where 10 exciting transportation companies will reveal their progress during the program. While the transportation sector historically has not been a strong sector for Start-ups and Venture Capital – it is now booming!

Long lead times to get to market, high CAPEX and a rigid value chain have been some of the reasons in the past. However the last few years we have seen the rise of a new set of Transportation Start-ups that utilize tech and new business models to change the way the market function. We have seen fantastic customer experiences as a result with Uber and Tesla being the poster success cases. New accelerators such as Techstars mobility, Startup Bootcamp Transportation and an inflow of corporate venture capital are all contributing to the increase.

I have analyzed the transportation Venture landscape in an attempt to quantify this trend. The underlying data includes uncertainties, especially when it comes to define a Transportation Start-ups but the trends presented are so clear that I feel confident that they hold true. (And is looking forward to feedback that points other directions.)

It is for sure exciting to see that the amount of Venture Capital invested in 2014 supersedes that of 2010-2013 combined(!) and reached a new record of almost 7 BUSD. 2015 will likely significantly surpass that since 6 BUSD already have been invested in the first half of the year.

Dollar invested in Transportation sector

The increase in number of deals is also significant but not as dramatic, approximately a doubling since 2010.

Number of transportation VC deals

Looking at the geographical distribution of the capital being invested into the transportation sector it is clear that US is highly dominant. Europe´s share has decreased from 14% in 2010 to only 1% in the first six months of 2015. Significant growth has come from China and India that represents 27% the first half of 2015.

Geographical distribution of Transportation Venture deals

Looking at California’s share of global activity it is clear that California increasingly dominates dollar invested. This is no surprise given the presence of Uber, Lyft and Tesla but solidifies Silicon Valley’s new role as the epicenter for the next generation of automotive innovation.

California share of global transportation VC investments

What does this inflow of entrepreneurship say about the Transportation sector’s future?

  1. The pace of innovation is rapidly increasing

Connectivity, autonomous technology and new business models have the potential to change industry fundamentals. The features and technology areas that historically have been the competitive fighting grounds are now being complemented or even substituted with the ability to fit into consumers’ digital lifestyle. Tech companies such as Apple and Google as well as several Start-ups such as Uber, Getaround, Automatic, Zirx, Waze, etc are leading the charge of building the tech and services that are winning. At the same time OEMS need to continue to invest heavily in powertrain development to meet future greenhouse gas emission legislation. BMW is for example expected to electrify all models within a decade.

  1. The traditional Automotive value chain is being challenged by entrants with Software as a core differentiator

It is no news that software development is now a large part of Automotive R&D. Several of the new VC founded entrants have founders and teams with software skills at their core. Building the tech based services of tomorrow demands rapid iteration, use of the latest platforms and relentless execution. It seems as if VC backed entrepreneurs are better equipped than the existing value chain to drive change.

  1. New business models leading to changed customer behaviors and resulting changes in demand are currently being implemented in US and China first

The significant concentration of Transportation Venture investments into US, (67%) and China (18%) results in customers experiencing innovative services in these markets first. This leads to changed customer needs for the whole value chain. A person who utilizes ridesharing to get to and from work might have reduced interest in car ownership. And a driver for these services probably changes her criteria when buying a car. Being active and sensitive to these changes allows companies to adapt their products, create partnerships and potentially launch competitive services.

It is not surprising that US and Silicon Valley is dominating Transportation/Automotive investments provided its role as the Software capital of the world. However the highly marginalized role of Europe is hard to explain given its strong automotive industry.

Europe is still a dominant area for Automotive R&D with almost 40 BUSD in annual R&D investments compared to less than 20 BUSD for US. It will be interesting to see what effect the low rate of Automotive European Start-ups will have on the relative competitiveness of the global automotive sector going forward.

I think it is safe to assume that companies in the automotive value chain that are able to find efficient ways to collaborate and leverage the new entrants, (both Start-ups and Tech companies) will have significant advantages in the marketplace.

Posted in Automotive, Transportation, Venture capital | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The future of Local trucking is Tech based

Local trucking, i.e. the transportation of goods with a truck that is transported within 150 miles of a metropolitan area is a $40-50 billion dollar market in the U.S. alone.

The supply side of the market is to a large degree comprised of amazingly hard-working small business owners with 1-10 trucks. The total number of registered local trucking companies is around 220,000 whereas about 380,000 drivers are employed in the industry, leaving the average at 1.7 drivers/company.  Demand side is also highly fragmented with manufacturing (30-40%), retail (25-35%), and agriculture (10-15%) as the largest sectors. Creating an efficient marketing and sales function for these small fleets in this environment is a huge challenge and traditional methods consist of direct sales, brokers, load boards and long-standing relationships.

It is a market with significant information asymmetry. Looking at it from an optimization standpoint, the problem has for a long time had way too little data to create anything near an optimal solution.

Local trucking redefined

Local trucking powered by Cargomatic 

The latest addition to our investment portfolio, Cargomatic, , is about to change that and bring a new level of efficiency to local trucking. Inspired by the Uberification movement where supply and demand are connected in real-time, they have created a fantastic product that we believe will have a profound positive impact on local trucking.

The concept is easy to grasp: by connecting trucks/drivers utilizing a smartphone, Cargomatic is able to match trucks with free capacity with shippers in real-time. However, getting such a platform to be attractive to both truckers and shippers demands very deep understanding of the needs of both sides, and a product that is advanced on the backend and very simple to use on the front-end. The process of transporting goods demands a high amount of administration before and after a transaction; Cargomatic reduces that process significantly and digitalizes all of it.

Talking with Cargomatic co-founders Jonathan Kessler and Brett Parker, it becomes clear that they are on a mission to create a tech-based solution that really makes life easier for hard-working local truckers. We believe this vision is the right one on which to build a hugely successful company and something that also resonates with the core values of Volvo. There have historically been a lot of solutions that mainly create price transparency without additional value added, creating a race to zero margin and an unsustainable business.

Talking to truckers on the platform, we heard superlatives about the service. For several truckers the Cargomatic platform is the difference between barely making it and being able to expand. Getting a high fill rate for the trucks is always top of the agenda; however the time to chase loads is highly limited. Cargomatic provides them with loads in their proximity/route, while also helping them manage administration and guarantee quick payment.

On the other side of equation, shippers today have the choice between well-known transport companies with a guaranteed high-service level for a premium price, or a smaller fleet/owner-operator that may or may not provide an acceptable service level. Cargomatic aims to deliver a high service level with the price tag of a smaller fleet. We believe they are on that route through the use of tech, ratings, and analytics.

This, together with fantastic traction in their first market, the $4-5 billion dollar local trucking market in Los Angeles, makes us thrilled to welcome Cargomatic to the Volvo Group Venture Capital portfolio.

Jonas Landstrom

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Venture funding is on the rise in the transportation sector

The transportation and automotive industry represents more than 10% of U.S. GDP, making it one of the largest industries with more than $1.5 trillion dollar in annual spend. Entrepreneurs are taking notice and both corporate and financial investors are supporting them in creating the next generation transportation and automotive solutions.

Volvo Ventures ambition is to be a leading corporate investor in sustainable transport solutions. During the past two years we have analyzed investment trends in the U.S. transportation sector. Analysis like this is challenging due to the fact that defining and tagging companies is not an exact science. However, the goal is not to be completely correct but to describe the overall trends.

In the time period of 2012 to Aug 2014, we’ve identified a total of 294 transportation VC deals1 at a total value of 4.5 billion dollar.

VC deals and money invested

Figure 1: Number of VC deals and amount of investments made in Transportation companies between 2012 and Aug 2014.

The amount of investment was stable between 2012 and 2013 but has increased significantly during 2014 as a result of large rounds raised by Uber and Lyft..

Comparing transportation VC to total deals and dollars invested, we see that the deal share has been pretty stable around 2%, whereas the amount invested has increased significantly, as seen in figure 2.

Pic 3








Figure 2: Uber and Lyft have increased the share of VC dollars that goes to transportation deals.

Out of approximately 100 transportation deals per year, top 20 deals represent the majority of money invested (2012 – 83%, 2013 – 74% and YTD 2014 – 85%).

Since the top 20 companies each year roughly represents 80% of the funding, we looked more closely at those companies. We classified them into seven categories based on business model and segment, as seen in figure 3.

Top VC funded Transportation companies 2012-2014

Figure 3: Classification of the transportation companies that have done the 20 largest funding rounds during 2012 to end of August 2014. The Full stack Start-up concept is described in Chris Dixon’s blog, http://cdixon.org/2014/03/15/full-stack-startups/

We have divided the companies into Full stack vs. companies selling products/services into the transportation value chain. As seen in figure 4, the majority of investments have gone to start-ups taking on the Full stack and going all the way to control the customer experience.

We believe this makes a lot of sense. The transportation value chain is known for its rigidity protected by legislation, long-term relationships, and challenges to work with small innovative companies which translates into high barriers to enter the value chain. Full stack start-ups are changing the game, Uber/Lyft being the two most obvious examples. They are simultaneously attacking product experience, legislative challenges and are changing consumers’ expectations and behavior in the taxi/ridesharing industry. Their data driven approach powered by software as a core capability makes it somewhere between hard to impossible for existing companies to compete with them.

fullstack share







Figure 4: Start-ups with a Full stack approach dominate VC funding during 2012-2014.

It has proven to be difficult to build start-ups based on developing and selling electric components into the automotive value chain. Tesla came along and designed an electric car from the ground up and created a multi-billion dollar company. One can argue that there were other examples of Full stack start-ups that did not make it, (Fisker and Better place)) and component companies that did ok. Still it is hard to see any company selling into the traditional automotive value chain to have such a big impact on the industry in such a short amount of time as the Full stack start-ups we now see develop.

The transportation sector represents a huge market and Uber/Lyft and Tesla have showed that technology in combination with business model innovation can create very successful companies.

We believe this is just the beginning and that we will see significantly more funding going into disrupting additional verticals of the transportation sector utilizing technology to change the way transportation of goods and people is done.

1 Primary data source is Pitchbook.

Posted in Venture capital | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Eat or be eaten – those are the options.

We believe new models for large companies to collaborate with entrepreneurs will be a key factor in future growth.

Software continues to eat the world1. The commercial vehicle industry might not appear to be the most delicious target, until you look at the trillion dollar goods transportation business. The commercial vehicle industry is no exception to the well-known fact: It is a challenge for any hardware-focused manufacturer to cope with the rapid pace of software development and the inherently different development style of successful software companies. In the commercial vehicle industry, IT has gone from being an important internal tool to being an essential component in customer value propositions.  As such, it is all the more key for manufacturers in this space to successfully collaborate with software companies in order to stay ahead of new technology developments and deliver a combined product that exceeds customer expectations.

Volvo Group has identified seven technology mega trends that will have a big impact on both internal processes and future service offerings.

The Seven Mega Trends

Mobility & mobile cloud – The continued increase in cloud-connected mobile device penetration still has major potential to impact processes and enable new business models

Human Computer Interaction – Designing products to enable different users (e.g., technicians, drivers, fleet owners) to efficiently access and interact with information and systems.

Internet of people – Levels of connectivity continue to increase and new ways to use the internet and connected services continue to grow

Internet of things – Things connected to the internet with sensors generating data provide new opportunities to control, visualize and measure activities and deliver new services across multiple domains.

Big data – Data is becoming so voluminous or complex that we can’t use “normal” data management tools, giving rise to new types of data management technology.

Smart machines – The emergence of autonomous vehicles, autonomous robots, intelligent personal assistants, smart advisors and advanced global industrial control systems.

Anything as a service – The Internet model for acquiring resources through pay-as-you-go models or by tapping into “the cloud”. Overall connectivity is a key enabler for this trend, which will have a big impact on future business models.

We use these trends as a guide to bring new solutions to our operations and to our customers. A small agile team, Volvo Group Planning & Innovation has a hands-on model to enable rapid testing of new solutions together with internal stakeholders, innovative partner/supplier companies and customers. The business prototyping model is inspired from agile design thinking and lean start-up methodologies. We take an outside-in approach, aiming to look beyond the traditional commercial truck industry when searching for new value for our customers, and seek to co-create with third parties in the prototyping phase. This business prototyping method has been used within Volvo Group for the last 12 years.  In that time, more than 80 business prototypes in various domains have been explored. Key principals for the business prototypes are:

  • A rapid & agile development period of 12 weeks
  • Outside-in approach, searching for inspiration from other industries
  • Co-creation with multiple innovative technology or service providers, customers and users
  • Experimental and hands-on field testing to gain insights on both opportunities and barriers

After the prototyping phase, a cross-functional committee decides either to end the project or transition to a pilot phase. When prototypes are stopped, progress in the area can continue to be monitored and possibly re-engaged in the future.

The findings from the prototypes are always communicated broadly within the Volvo Group via different channels such as webinars, seminars and the intranet with the purpose of transfering insights and spurring new ideas.

Some examples of innovation prototypes we’ve explored during the years:


Volvo Group Venture Capital partners with fantastic entrepreneurs and, in addition to capital, makes sure that Volvo Group thoroughly explores opportunities for collaboration with external companies. As a core principle, Volvo Group Venture Capital maintains a separation between its investments and any commercial agreements.

The “not invented here” mentality, management turnover and simply access to the right people in a large, global company can all be significant hindrances for entrepreneurs or young companies trying to strike deals. Volvo Group Venture Capital has a strong track record of breaking down those barriers and enabling win-win situations that leverage the strengths of the large company and the speed, focus and agility of start-ups.

Combining the Venture Capital team’s model with the Planning & Innovation team’s approach to testing joint opportunities in real conditions creates a strong solution. We look forward to accelerating these activities, building value for customers, the Volvo Group and entrepreneurs. If you work on software-based solutions for the transportation industry and have ideas for partnerships, you know where to find us!

Jonas Landström, Head of Americas, Volvo Group Venture Capital
Tommy Hansson, Business Innovation Manager, Volvo Group Planning & Innovation

1. Interview with Marc Andressen where he lays out his “Software eats the world” thesis, http://www.wired.com/2012/04/ff_andreessen/5/



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Trucking – a 650 billion dollar market ripe for disruption

Goods transportation with trucks represents a 650 billion dollar market in the US, which is about 5% of GDP. The chart below compares the trucking industry to a few other industries which really shows the massive market it represents.

3market size

Source: SELECTUSA, 2014

The 650 billion dollar is split between Truckload carriers 310 billion, Private fleets 290 billion and Less Than Truckload carriers at 50 billion dollar.

The trucking market is highly fragmented with more than 400 000 for-hire carriers and 600 000 private carriers. These companies have in total around 3 million heavy duty trucks in operation. About 97% of all fleets operate fewer than 20 trucks. On the other hand the top 10 For-hire and Private fleets have about 350 000 trucks representing more than 10% of all trucks, i.e. there is room for both SMB and enterprise plays.

Top 10 For-hire and Private fleets in the US

For Hire carriers Private fleets
Company No of heavy trucks Company No of heavy trucks

102 851


23 410


81 596

Coca Cola

9 782


15 231


9 348

YRC worldwide

14 572


6 523


11 800


6 034


11 563


5 828


11 380

US Foods

5 766

JB Hunt

10 187


3 942

Landstar System

8 399


3 910

Ryder Supply Chain Systems

4 201

Reyes Holdings

3 362


271 780


77 905

Source:Transport Topics, Top 100 (2013)

New truck sales is highly cyclical with about 230 000 heavy duty trucks sold in 2012 whereas only 118 000 were sold in the tough year of 2009. The average sales price for a new truck is about $115 000 making the total market size for Heavy Duty trucks in the 25-30 billion dollar range. The total aftermarket is valued at 20-25 billion annually and is naturally more stable than new truck sales.

The trucking industry is labor intensive with more than 3 million HD truck drivers and a lack of qualified drivers is an increasing problem for the industry.

A cost breakdown for an average trucking operation is shown below. This changes with type of operation but provides an idea of what costs that make up the majority. Provided that fuel makes up more than 35% of the cost it is easy to understand the strong focus on fuel efficiency in the industry.

11Cost structure

Source: American Trucking Association, (2014)

Cost pressure is a constant factor and profit margin is for most parts of the value chain counted in single digits.

Trucking – the Venture Capital perspective

As Venture investors focused on the commercial vehicle industry we meet with fantastic entrepreneurs that are moving the industry forward in different areas. A couple of areas where we see opportunities for disruptive innovation and new entrants are:

  • Market places that increase liquidity and efficiency in the market utilizing mobile technology
  • Connected services to lower fuel cost, increase safety, remotely diagnose and overall improve efficiency
  • E-commerce for parts and accessories (See previous blog post on the subject)
  • Analytics services that utilize data from the different sources within fleets to enable better decisions. This could range from what loads to accept, which routes to cover, which vehicles to purchase, how to coach the drivers and other areas that supports the operation

The trucking industry is hugely important for the economy and increased efficiency based on technology will drive the industry forward.

Bottom line, I believe there will be billion dollar companies coming out of the Trucking segment the coming five years.

Jonas Landström

Image | Posted on by | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

eCommerce in Heavy-Duty Parts & Accessories – who and how?

Approximately $14 Billion in passenger car parts and accessories (P&A) were sold online last year.  That means more than 10% of passenger car P&A sales are online.  I estimate <1% of heavy-duty P&A sales happen online today.  How will eCommerce emerge in heavy-duty P&A?  There is much to consider.

The traditional brick-and-mortar dealers and retailers are not the ones driving the growth in passenger car P&A sales online; it is estimated that half of the online sales volume in passenger car P&A is going through eBay, and a very small percent is going through major retailer websites.

Could it be different with heavy-duty parts eCommerce?  To deliver the highest potential value to a heavy-duty truck owner, I think it has to be different.

Heavy-duty truck owners can measure days out of service in dollars of business lost.  Every truck owner manages towards maximizing “uptime” and reducing days out of service.  Unlike many consumer goods, heavy-duty parts are not driven by normal shopping behavior, but rather by a part failure or maintenance event.  Faster fulfillment options on replacement parts make a real difference.  Leveraging stores and dealers that are near to the customer as fulfillment options for an online sale can deliver a better experience for the customer.  The shelves and stock rooms of brick-and-mortar locations can serve as “forward deployed inventory”, sold online or over the counter depending on who clicks “buy” or walks in that day. Local pick up or potentially even same day local delivery for an eCommerce order becomes possible if the nearby brick-and-mortar location has the item in stock.  Shipping from a retail location that is closer to the customer than an eCommerce distribution center (or a potential drop-ship vendor) could significantly shorten shipping time.

Beyond convenient pick up or shorter shipping time, brick-and-mortar locations can install and service a part purchased online.  Anything requiring installation is more difficult to sell in a pure eCommerce model unless the customers have the equipment and know-how to install it themselves. Having nearby service locations can enable a product sale by coupling it with an often-needed local installation or service.  Even the possibility of local support should increase the potential buyer’s comfort with, and ultimate conversion in, an eCommerce sale.

Is this improved model likely to be the dominant emerging model in heavy duty P&A eCommerce?  Frankly, I think pure eCommerce players are better positioned to gain traction first.  It will take time to tackle the major challenges of running a combined eCommerce + brick-and-mortar retail strategy (often referred to as an “omnichannel” business).  If today’s big store-based players can conquer those challenges though, they should be able to win customers with the superior experience.

So, onto those challenges: First and foremost, it is very difficult to build an effective eCommerce business out of a store-focused business.   Pure eCommerce players tend to be lean and nimble, and require a very different set of employee skills than traditional retail store management. Trying to build an eCommerce business out of a retail store business can mean having a higher cost structure and mismatched expertise.

As one element of that higher cost structure, having a physical location in a US state today means having to pay local sales tax on an eCommerce sale heading to a customer in that state.  Internet sales tax in the US is evolving, but right now that is an additional cost that pure eCommerce players often avoid.

Beyond that, if the stores group and the eCommerce group are run separately, they can become a liability for each other. Completely separate online and in-store businesses can create an inconsistent, confusing, potentially frustrating customer experience (e.g., different product assortment than the consumer expects to find in either channel, inconsistent pricing, inability to return online orders in-store).

Running a successful omnichannel business also means a high degree of back-end integration between eCommerce and retail store systems (inventory and supply chain management, order management, point-of-sale, etc.).  That often means tackling issues with, and trying to add new functionality to, legacy IT systems that have been largely regarded as a cost center to be managed rather than an asset to invest in.  Achieving that integration can therefore be a substantial effort.

I am ready to see eCommerce become a bigger part of heavy-duty P&A, and I think many P&A customers are ready as well.  The question now is: how will it happen?  Will fast-moving, tech-savvy, pure eCommerce players make a big push and gain loyalty first?  Will the big companies with dealerships or stores rise up and deliver a superior experience to a broad audience first?  Will third-party providers step in to help enable those big players to lead, or at least quickly follow, with a better offering?

Leave comments and let me know what you think.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment