Several media outlets and industry experts have weighed in recently with their thoughts on Amazon’s planned $13.7 billion purchase of Whole Foods, including The Washington Post, in which its “On Leadership” column cited several “telling comments” made by Whole Foods CEO John Mackey. Sample comments include the following.
- Mackey admitted that Whole Foods may be too employee-focused, and although he didn’t back down from the importance of treating employees well, he said that Amazon is “more customer-centric than we are… we’re gonna become as customer-centric as Amazon.”
- In a sharp contrast from when Zappos was purchased by Amazon and pledged to remain independent, Mackey said that “when this deal closes, we’re all Amazon people.”
- Mackey acknowledged that his company has been a little behind in technology as compared to Amazon, and pledged that “we’ll go to the front of the class, eventually, in the grocery business.”
A subsequent article in The Washington Post reported on the deal’s potential impact on small farmers and food producers, who are worried that Amazon will use its market power to further centralize production and boost larger, industrialized organic operations. In addition, industry activists and farmers advocates are fearful of the pressure Amazon may put on producers for price concessions, which could cause them to compromise on environmental and formulation standards.
According to an article written by CNBC’s Chantel McGee, a data scientist claims that the merger is less about stores and more about data. Specifically, Boston College Professor Kenneth Sanford said that one of Amazon’s goals should be to combine the data it already collects online and via Echo and Alexa, with Whole Foods’ customer transaction data.
The data collected would enable the company to predict what customers need and automatically send it to them. “Amazon will know what’s in your refrigerator already and be able to deliver extra turmeric when you need it,” said Sanford.
Grocery e-commerce retailer Instacart is already working towards this goal. According to Jeremy Stanley, the company’s vice president of data science, Instacart uses customer behavioral data and search activity to anticipate what a customer wants or might like.
“One of the wonderful things about groceries is that compared to other e-commerce purchases, groceries are habitual and frequent,” Stanley said. “Groceries are really personal… and I think data can really change the way people buy food.”
Supermarket News reported on the deal’s potential impact on competitors, including Instacart, whose service generates more than $200 million in sales annually for Whole Foods. Should Amazon decide to pull out of the deal in favor of its own delivery service, it could harm Instacart, and perhaps Instacart’s other customers as well. Furthermore, rather than replacing Instacart, Amazon could attempt to purchase it.
Sprouts Farmers Market has been competing successfully against Whole Foods in certain markets, and has made plans to partner with Amazon Prime Now for e-commerce. Perhaps the Amazon – Whole Foods deal could kill this partnership, or even make Sprouts an attractive Amazon target. Having Whole Foods and Sprouts under the same ownership could save Whole Foods from spending on its 365 format since Sprouts could fulfill the small format need.
Walmart’s success integrating physical and digital assets, which has led to strong sales results in recent years, has not gone unnoticed by Amazon. And grocery, which generates frequent and habitual trips, has been central to Walmart’s strategy, not to mention the company’s expanded offerings in grocery pickup and delivery strategies. As the Supermarket News article points out, Amazon and Walmart are gunning for each other.
Lastly, natural and organic food consumers have seen big retailers like Costco and Kroger catch on to the trend that Whole Foods pioneered, and these retailers have hurt Whole Foods on price. With Amazon’s buying power, that price advantage may eventually disappear – or at least lesson – resulting in Whole Foods recapturing sales at the expense of others.