IMO the only similarity between 1PG and GSW is that both products are SaaS.
The rest of your comparisons have no bearing on the product, market, technology, rate structure, value proposition to board rooms, management, customers/end users. It's causation and correlation.
Both companies might have IPO'd on the third of the month, but who cares?
- HR software is a saturated market. Every organisation I have worked for uses a different platform (ConnX, Employment Hero, EnableHR and in-house built). All platforms offer the same product. Mgmt have countless options for HR software.
- Management is focused on cost reduction of HR as there is no direct value added to the organisations P&L through HR.
- HR platforms are a stand alone product; no integration required, no reliance on third parties (drivers). The user logs into HR software online and uses the online portal making barriers to entry low - just build a system, put an online interface over it and go to market with your "solution".
1PG and GSW are chalk and pears.
A few other people on this forum who have worked in freight can all share horror stories about 3rd party last miles co's/ truck drivers. Key words are unreliable, unaccountable, slow, unprofessional. As I have said before, GSW gives management CONTROL of their Last Mile, plus all the other efficiency gains in the GSW case studies.
GSW has huge potential because of the truly disruptive nature of its technology in a market overdue for change. If GSW cannot execute, I'm sure there will someone else closely behind to pick up the scraps and learn where GSW went wrong.
However, GSW have the early mover advantage, a number of MNC's on board (with a proclaimed "large pipeline" of Fortune 1000s) and 100 mil in the bank to resolve any implementation issues they face.
IMPLEMENTATION RISK
This is my take on the current implementation risk GSW face. I work as an Implementation Manager for a global logistics company.
GSW require the following information from customers to complete each transaction:
- Shipper/ DC address
- Receiver address
- PO#/ Shippers Reference
- Freight Type (Dangerous Goods?)
- Volume (and dims)
- Weight
- Piece count
This information is contained on POs, which are raised through MNC's Operating Systems. But the PO function is the ONLY part of customers OS GSW need to draw data from.
What GSW give customers per transaction:
- Time of Delivery
- Date of Delivery
- Delivery accepted by
- Signature
3 data fields and an image.
This information is contained on the Delivery Order and needs to be up-loaded into customers OS in a single-file per transaction. Uploading data into someone elses system is harder than drawing it out.
Saying that, my organisation does this for a number of customers and we use outdated technology (and charge an arm and a leg for it).
The rest of the information (live tracking, reporting, pairing drivers etc) are self-contained IN the GSW platform. No implementation risk to deliver this (the risk here is that the technology can stand up).
I have done multiple vertical implementations for a number of global companies. The largest risk I face is the quality and value of the data coming from the customer, and it's mostly from places like China and the Middle East with crap information (global logs). I've never had any issues with implementation for Export customers or imports from US/EU.
I think Johnny Rockets will be their hardest implementation. Someone like Amazon or Yum! which have a logical and global OS will be easier to implement than a busted-as$ mid east outfit like JR - IMO.
At the AGM, GSW said their latest signing requires them to add 6 new languages to the platform (taking it to 12 total). Then they sign Amazon... I believe the market things the Amazon MSA is worth nothing because they've given no details, but IMO they are keeping their cards close to their chest for a reason (negotiating prices with other customers).
GSW is a disruptive technology to a problem faced by all organisations with no direct competitors that has huge support from MNC's, strategy of global dominance, excessively large cash reserves AND no debt...
Expand
