Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Upcoming SlideShare
What to Upload to SlideShare
What to Upload to SlideShare
Loading in …3
×
1 of 21

ADI -- Digital Divide 2019

1

Share

Download to read offline

With eCommerce growth expected to slow, down 13% from 14.3% in 2018 to 12.4% this year we wanted to determine if there were regional/demographic/behavioral differences.

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

ADI -- Digital Divide 2019

  1. 1. City Profiles: The Digital Divide
  2. 2. 2 Visit our website: adobe.ly/AdobeInsights Sign up for email alerts: http://www.cmo.com/adiregister.html Follow us: @adobeinsights Profiling How American Cities Shop Online Based on analysis of aggregate and anonymous data via: • Adobe Analytics measures transactions at 80 of the top 100** retailers on the web in the U.S. • Product and pricing insights based on analysis of sales of more than 55 million unique products • American Community Survey used to profile US Cities; simplecmaps.com used to get location and population figures • 4,.500+ cities used in analysis Adobe Advertising Cloud ** Source: Adobe Analysis of Internet Retailer 2018 Adobe Experience Cloud Adobe Analytics Cloud CITY PROFILES | 2019 Methodology
  3. 3. CITY PROFILES | 2019 Methodology Definitions • Research Objective: • With ecommerce growth expected to slow, down 13% from 14.3% in 2018 to 12.4% this year we wanted to determine if there were regional/demographic/behavioral differences. • Individual City Profiles: • Big vs. Small: based on population of over/under 100,000 people • High Income vs. Med/Low Income: based on per capita income above or below $50,000 • Rural vs. Urban: determined by county area defined as rural; 40% used as the line of demarcation • Financially Stressed vs. OK: top ranked on composite of unemployment, no health insurance and below poverty line • Diverse vs. Homogeneous: top ranked on composite of race (non-white), other language than English, and not native to state of residence • High Revenue Growth vs. Low Growth: cities above/below 20% YoY growth in ecommerce • Smartphone High Order Value vs. Smartphone Share of Revenue: top third on each metric, but not in both 3
  4. 4. CITY PROFILES | 2019 4 Key Findings • Large cities are driving stronger e-commerce growth than smaller cities • Affluent/High Income Cities are fueling the online economy, but they don’t convert easily are not able to stop overall e-commerce growth from slowing • Diverse Cities outperform homogenous cities, across practically every e-commerce growth metric • Rural areas' infrastructure shortcomings are limiting ecommerce adoption and their contribution to the online economy • Desktops orders continue to boast higher AOVs, which should be considered as more users migrate to smartphones, and lower income households make smartphones their sole purchasing device
  5. 5. 16.4% 12.6% 8.5% 8.1% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% Revenue Growth Visit Growth Topline Growth Population over 100k Population Under 100k CITY PROFILES: Big vs. Small | 2019 Larger cities driving online retail revenue growth. • Cities over 100k people contribute to ecommerce commensurate with their population • Visit Index: 106 and Revenue Index: 98 • Larger cities exhibiting stronger Year over Year growth, with all drivers up year over year • Smaller cities had an edge on conversion, RPV and AOV, larger cites had the edge on unit price • With differential ecommerce growth there maybe a digital divide in the not too distant future 1.9x 1.6x 5 Method: Indices are defined as “share of {metric}” divided by “share of population”. YoY Change in Key Drivers Population over 100k Population Under 100k RPV 1.6% 4.9% Conversion 1.3% 2.8% AOV -0.3% 1.9% Unit Price 8.9% 7.0%
  6. 6. CITY PROFILES: Big vs. Small | 2019 Large market consumers look for different things than small market shoppers. • Computers, Phones & Electronics along with Baby & Toddler shows largest positive share swing between segments • Memberships* and Apparel & Accessories account for smaller share of visits 6 Method: Indices are defined as “share of {category} among target segment” divided by “share of {category} among rest of cities” Visits used instead of revenue due to the large variance in unit pricing across categories. * Memberships refer to programs offered by retailer to gain access to products and or services. More likely to buy Less likely to buy Similar shares. (1.00) - 1.00 Computers, Phones & Electronics Baby & Toddler Hobbies, Toys & Sporting Goods Gifts & Flowers Personal Care & Medical Equip Alcohol & Tobacco Pet Products Auto Parts & DIY Toys & Sporting Goods Home & Housekeeping Media & Entertainment Grocery Office & Professional Apparel & Accessories Memberships Difference in Shopping by Category Small Market. Large Market
  7. 7. CITY PROFILES: Big vs. Small | 2019 Conversion, not order value, separates big markets from small. • In large cities, smartphones steal share from both desktops and tablets. • Smartphones account for $1 in $3 in large cities • Are consumers taking advantage of more points of distribution? 7 61% 32% 7% 66% 25% 9% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Share of Revenue by Device Population over 100k Population Under 100k • Higher conversion in smaller cities, 2.4% vs. 2.0%, raises the value (RPV) of those visitors • Consumers in large cities place slightly bigger orders (AOV) from higher priced items but conversion dampens revenue per visit Population over 100k Population Under 100k RPV $3.14 $3.64 Conversion 2.0% 2.4% AOV $160 $154 Unit Price $39.77 $37.40 Basket Size 4.0 4.1
  8. 8. HOLIDAY PREDICTIONS | TALE OF TWO HOLIDAYS | 2019 Retailers See Traffic From Across the US Markets profiled split into 3 segments and account for 180M people. • 1,028 high income markets (median HHI $100K) tend to cluster around major metropolitan areas (7% of county is rural) • 965 low income markets (median HHI $33k) are spread across the country, often in outlying areas (40% of county is rural) High Income Market examples: • Palm Beach, FL • Atherton, CA • Scottsdale, AZ • Glencoe, IL • Bronxville, NY Low Income markets represented by: • Coatesville, PA • San Juan, TX • Gatesville, TX • Clinton, SC • Gainesville, GA
  9. 9. HOLIDAY PREDICTIONS | TALE OF TWO HOLIDAYS | 2019 The Value of High-Income Markets is Traffic Market commentary • Relative to their share of the population, high income cities produce more retail traffic than low income. • Improving visit performance vs. generating more visits represents a viable strategic distinction +40% Visits High vs. Low Income Markets+40%
  10. 10. HOLIDAY PREDICTIONS | TALE OF TWO HOLIDAYS | 2019 Growth This Holiday Likely to Come from High Income Markets Online retail shopping expanding among households with median HHI of $100k while it is contracting in markets where households have median HHI of $33k in income. Concentration of sales appears to be moving to Higher Income Markets. High Income markets showed slight improvement in Revenue per Visit (RPV) of +2% vs. no change year over year.
  11. 11. HOLIDAY PREDICTIONS | TALE OF TWO HOLIDAYS | 2019 Everyone, regardless of income, takes advantage of Holiday Weekend deals. The value of a visit increased 74% during the five-day weekend regardless of where consumers’ income. The gain comes from better conversion since there is only a small increase in average order value (AOV) Key Metric Segment 6 Months ending Aug 2018 Holiday Weekend 2018 Holiday Lift RPV Low Income $3.81 $6.64 74% High Income $3.89 $6.73 73% AOV Low Income $148 $163 10% High Income $155 $157 1% Conversion Low Income 2.6% 4.1% 59% High Income 2.5% 4.3% 71% There is a switch in AOV – prior to the weekend higher income markets placed larger orders, that flipped during the five-day weekend before settling back down.
  12. 12. HOLIDAY PREDICTIONS | TALE OF TWO HOLIDAYS | 2019 Income Level Shifts the Types of Discretionary Products Consumers Buy Online. 75%+ of US e-commerce spend during the holidays is on personal items as opposed to more generic items for the household. • In low income markets spend shifts toward “something to do” with Media & Entertainment capturing more share of wallet than in high income markets.. • High Income cities shift spending toward other types of discretionary items., including the large Apparel & Accessories category. High Income markets spend more on these items.
  13. 13. 4.1% 6.0% 13.0% 13.4% 0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0% 16.0% Revenue Growth Visit Growth Topline Growth City In Rural Counties City In Urban Counties CITY PROFILES: Rural vs. Urban | 2019 Rural area ecommerce growth trails urban areas. • Consumers in rural areas shop less online than those in urban areas • Visit Index: 72 and Revenue Index: 79 • Cities in rural counties exhibiting weak Year over Year growth • Rural markets trending positive on all four drivers; driving traffic may be the objective 3.1x 2.2x 13 Method: Indices are defined as “share of {metric}” divided by “share of population”. YoY Change in Key Drivers City In Rural Counties City In Urban Counties RPV 7.5% 3.8% Conversion 5.1% 2.0% AOV 2.2% 1.7% Unit Price 4.7% 7.9%
  14. 14. CITY PROFILES: Rural vs. Urban | 2019 Strong rural conversion suggests intent when they do shop. • In towns in rural areas, smartphones less prevalent than in more urban areas. • Smartphones account for $1 in $4 in rural areas 14 • Higher conversion in rural cities, 2.7% vs. 2.1%, raises the value (RPV) of those visitors • Despite consumers in rural cities placing smaller orders (AOV) consisting of less expensive items. • More intent, less “tire kicking” City In Rural Counties City In Urban Counties RPV $3.71 $3.39 Conversion 2.7% 2.1% AOV $139 $158 Unit Price $33.02 $38.86 Basket Size 4.2 4.1 65% 25% 10% 63% 29% 8% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Desktop Smartphone Tablet Share of Revenue by Device City In Rural Counties City In Urban Counties
  15. 15. CITY PROFILES: Rural vs. Urban | 2019 Cities in rural counties found everywhere east of the Mississippi • Description: Small towns that are economically below national averages • Less educated in general • Shift toward from manufacturing, transportation and agriculture occupations • Location: sparser in the West, some may be too small to be included in ACS. • Nearly absent in California – agricultural counties still have very large cities in them 15 Data source: American Community Survey, Census Bureau and Zillow National figures: $59k for Median HH Income and $227k for home value. City In Rural Counties City In Urban Counties No. of Cities in Segment 1,073 3,452 Avg Population 10,890 49,298 Median HH Income $42,789 $65,950 House Value $127,183 $260,403 Rural Percent 56.7 12.4 Mfr/Trans/Wholesale/AG Industry 23.8 19.9 Prof /Tech Industry 12.7 19.5 Enrolled In Bach+ Program 24.6 26.6 Have Bach+ Degree 21.1 32.1
  16. 16. 15.1% 21.7% 9.1% 7.9% 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% Revenue Growth Visit Growth Topline Growth Diverse Cities Homogeneous Cities CITY PROFILES: Diverse vs. Homogeneous | 2019 Cities defined by diversity outperform more uniform markets • Diverse cities contribute more to retailer visits and revenue than their population alone would suggest • Visit Index: 114 and Revenue Index: 107 • Diverse cities exhibited stronger Year over Year growth, particularly in terms of visits., • They led more homogeneous cities on all but conversion, but only lagged by a small amount. 1.7x 2.8x 16 Method: Indices are defined as “share of {metric}” divided by “share of population”. YoY Change in Key Drivers Diverse Cities Homogeneous Cities RPV 5.5% 4.4% Conversion 2.6% 2.7% AOV 2.2% 1.6% Unit Price 8.4% 6.7%
  17. 17. CITY PROFILES: Diverse vs. Homogeneous | 2019 Conversion separates Diverse Cities from Homogenous Cities. • In diverse cities, smartphones garner a higher share stealing from both desktops and tablets. • Smartphones account for $1 in $3 in large cities 17 61% 32% 7% 66% 25% 9% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Share of Revenue by Device Population over 100k Population Under 100k • Lower conversion in diverse cities, 1.9% vs. 2.6%, lessens the value (RPV) of those visitors • Consumers in diverse cities placing bigger orders (AOV) consisting of higher priced items illustrating the standard relationship. Diverse Cities Homogeneous Cities RPV $3.19 $3.76 Conversion 1.9% 2.6% AOV $166 $ 147 Unit Price $40.43 $36.13 Basket Size 4.1 4.1
  18. 18. CITY PROFILES: Higher vs. Lower Revenue Growth | 2019 Revenue growth comes from smaller markets • Description: While slightly smaller than low growth cities, all other demos are remarkably similar • Demographics don’t cause growth, but they can help explain it. • Easier to grow a small number than a big one. • Location: fairly well distributed throughout the country 18 Data source: American Community Survey High Revenue Growth Low Revenue Growth No. of Cities in Segment 963 3,562 Avg Population 26,146 43,987 Median HH Income $61,510 $ 60,174 House Value $244,244 $224,641 Rural Percent 23.1 22.8 Mfr/Trans/Wholesale/AG Industry 21.8 20.6 Prof /Tech Industry 17.6 18.0 Enrolled In Bach+ Program 24.4 26.6 Have Bach+ Degree 28.0 29.9
  19. 19. 13.5% 10.5%11.2% 19.3% 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% Revenue Growth Visit Growth Topline Growth High on Smartphone AOV High on Smartphone Share of Rev CITY PROFILES: Smartphone AOV vs. Share of Revenue | 2019 Judging smartphone shopping depends on how you measure it. • Smartphones can be viewed in two ways: • Consumers who place large orders on their phones • They have stronger revenue than visit growth • Consumers who use smartphones for a large portion of their spend • They have stronger visit growth than revenue growth • Both groups exhibit strong YoY metrics – much higher than overall totals 1.2x .5x 19 Method: Indices are defined as “share of {metric}” divided by “share of population” These are non-overlapping groups, some cities could be high on both metrics.. YoY Change in Key Drivers High on Smartphone AOV High on Smartphone Share of Rev RPV 17.6% 14.7% Conversion 13.7% 25.3% AOV 16.0% 21.1% Unit Price 12.5% 20.4%
  20. 20. (1.00) - 1.00 2.00 Toys & Sporting Goods Personal Care & Medical Equip Alcohol & Tobacco Memberships Pet Products Gifts & Flowers Baby & Toddler Office & Professional Auto Parts & DIY Grocery Home & Housekeeping Computers, Phones & Electronics Hobbies, Toys & Sporting Goods Media & Entertainment Apparel & Accessories Difference in Shopping by Category CITY PROFILES: Smartphone AOV vs. Share of Revenue | 2019 Consumers adopting these behaviors focus on different categories. • Consumers who use smartphones for a large proportion of their shopping spread their shopping around • Toys & Sporting Goods, Personal Care & Medial Equip, Alcohol & Tobacco command a larger share of visits than markets with high AOV. • Consumers with highest value for smartphone orders • Apparel & Accessories and Media & Entertainment capture higher share of eyeballs than their counterparts. 20 Method: Indices are defined as “share of {category} among target segment” divided by “share of {category} among rest of cities” Visits used instead of revenue due to the large variance in unit pricing across categories. . High Share more likely to visit High AOV more likely to visit Similar shares. AOV Share of Revenue
  21. 21. Powered by Adobe Analytics

×