By Casey Hall and Sophie Yu
SHANGHAI/Beijing (Reuters) – E-commerce retailer JD.com needs to convince investors of its relevance amid a stagnant Chinese e-commerce market, aggressive price war and now, the departure of Walmart, its biggest shareholder.
Walmart announced this week a full exit from the Beijing-based e-commerce platform, selling off its $3.74 billion stake, which triggered a 10% slump in its share price and raised questions about JD.com’s ability to withstand the changed landscape.
A decade ago founder Richard Liu persuaded investors the company could take on Alibaba, its bigger rival with his own business model, raising $1.8 billion, in what was then the biggest IPO by a Chinese firm in the U.S.
In 2014, Alibaba was a dominant force in China’s fledgling e-commerce market with nearly 80% market share.
Operating in the shadow of Alibaba, which largely relies on ad revenues and fees from vendors earned from facilitating sales, JD.com had a different but appealing approach.
Its business model, which involves direct selling to shoppers and heavy investment in supply chains and logistics, allowed the firm to nearly double its market share from 14% a decade ago to 27% in 2023.
JD’s early strategy of selling directly to consumers and delivering products via its own extensive logistics network helped engender trust in consumers who were – at the time – new to online shopping, encouraging them to spend significant sums on branded electronics and household appliances, and guaranteed fast delivery people valued.
“Loyal users still prefer to shop on JD.com; reason one is its delivery is fast, and reason two is quality on this platform is more guaranteed,” said Liu Xingliang, an internet business analyst at DCCI Data Center.
However, JD.com’s bloated cost structure and logistics that served it well are now a drag against its peers.
“Given its higher-end positioning, JD is less likely to deliver strong growth amid the current consumption weakness in China and its lack of diversification away from China vs peers like PDD,” said Morningstar analyst Chelsey Tam.
In contrast, the Alibaba Group has a workforce of around 200,000, and PDD Holdings – which has seen its market cap explode to five times that of JD.com’s $40 billion – has a comparatively tiny team of just 17,400 employees.
Its overhead costs have also pressured profitability. By the end of 2023, its workforce reached 517,000, including 355,000 delivery personnel.
Its operating margin was 4% in the second quarter, well below Alibaba’s 15% and PDD’s 26%.
JD.com did not respond to a request for comment.
STRATEGY TWEAKS
To confront slowing Chinese e-commerce growth, JD.com has enlisted third-party merchants to increase its offerings in price competitive products and private label products, Tam said.
It has also responded to competition from Alibaba’s Taobao and PDD’s Pinduoduo by further optimising its supply chain and logistics and leveraging economies of scale to attract shoppers with low prices without sacrificing quality.
On an earnings call last week when JD.com delivered a forecast-beating quarterly profit, CEO Sandy Xu reiterated that the low-price strategy was key to its growth.
However, some have doubts over how much supply chain optimisations can drive further revenue growth.
“JD.com’s stated strategy is to work with the manufacturers on low-cost versions of premium value goods, which sounds great, but I’m sceptical this will be the biggest driver of growth in the short term,” said tech analyst Rui Ma.
JD.com’s limited exposure to markets outside of China, with about 2% of revenue from its international businesses versus Alibaba’s approximately 10%, and its inability to tap into international markets for growth as effectively as its rivals, have been highlighted as strategic weaknesses.
Earlier this year, JD.com abandoned a bid to buy struggling British electronics retailer Currys. At the time, analysts said it could be a shortcut to the international expansion that Alibaba and PDD have invested years of time and billions of dollars in building.
Davy Huang, business development director at e-commerce consultancy Azoya, said expansion overseas was a good idea but warned it should avoid the race-to-the-bottom price war currently gripping cross-border e-commerce from China.
“The current cross-border export environment is quite toxic, focused on low price competition, heavy advertisement, subsidies on orders and profiteering from sellers,” he said.
“I don’t doubt their capabilities, but…the priority should be China now, to defend their position.”
(Reporting by Casey Hall in Shanghai and Sophie Yu in Beiing; Editing by Miyoung Kim and Jacqueline Wong)
