Restaurant POS – Toast Hangs Back While PAR and Olo Battle

toast pos

Restaurant POS News

Nice article from Reforming Retail — recommended

The enterprise segment of the US restaurant market (we’re defining as > 200-location brands) has few players.

Long sales cycles, demanding customers, and impossible delivery given the paltry amount restaurants pay for fuck-all make this a futile market to serve.

But hey, who are we to poke fun of masochists?

We’ll make a few quick comments before diving into our analysis to get the butthurt out of the way.

First, Revel.

The challenge we continue to hear about Revel is their reliance on iOS. Device management, Apple costs, etc. make this challenging for larger groups.

Second, Qu.

Qu has been around as long as Toast but they focused on limited service enterprise.

Great product, but Toast is worth $12B and Qu is worth maybe $100M.

Again, why the f*ck you’d want to sell to enterprise restaurants is anyone’s guess.

Qu has built some momentum, but not $11.9$B dollar’s worth.

Third, Oracle.

Solid leadership, but they’ve been slowed down by a replatforming to cloud (Simphony) that created churn, so now they’re building back up. In the interim they’ve shed customers. Also note that a lot of Oracle’s accounts were SMBs that left for Toast (Toast should be sending gifts monthly to Oracle’s resellers as a thank you for their incompetence).

Fourth, Aloha.

Nobody likes NCR. People suffer with it until they’ve depreciated it enough to move to a new system. The company will split soon enough and ride a long wave to irrelevance. Great case study of what happens when you bring in suits who optimize their salary instead of running the company the way it should be run.

Lastly, the also-rans.

There are handful of other POS systems that support the enterprise segment but they’re either old as hell (and dying as a consequence) or don’t have enough installs to warrant attention for this analysis.

By the way, Toast will eventually buy their way into the market.

At 10x the size of either Olo or PAR, Toast will either acquire PAR and Olo, or just eviscerate them. We’re talking long timescales here since restaurants are a lagging industry by any reasonable standard (and enterprise restaurant is even worse than that) but given Toast’s capitalization it’s just a matter of time.

Now that we’ve all got our Maxi Pads on in our safe spaces, we can dive in.

The imminent battle for US restaurants is coming down to two players: Olo and PAR.

Truthfully PAR and Olo should have merged before Olo went public.

Now, however, you can’t unring that bell.

At least not reasonably.

We’ll go product category by product category to give you our perspectives of how this battle plays out.

Here’s a quick background on each company to set the stage.

PAR

PAR was a government contracting agency that stumbled into Brink POS in 2015. Buying Brink was the best accidental move the Sammon family could have made, and it’s turned PAR a legitimate POS contender despite the Sammon’s best attempts. That Brink could have been Toast is an indictment on how poorly the asset was run until PAR’s now-CEO, Savneet Singh, took over in late 2018.

After assuming control, Savneet acquired Data Central to offer back office reporting, and Punchh to streamline loyalty. All-in, PAR oversees close to 70,000 rooftops, nearly all of which are chain operators. Brink POS is a leader in cloud POS for the limited service segments by installation count, while Data Central and Punchh give PAR a line of sight into table service and other market segments.

PAR also built a payfac, PAR Pay, to enable payment processing for its customers, representing another revenue generating product line for the company.

And they acquired MENU, a direct Olo competitor for online ordering.

PAR has a few challenges.

First, their product is skewed towards limited service chain operators. While full service dining is losing share to limited service on the macro, those establishments often come with higher margins (alcohol sales) and higher volume. This makes it more lucrative for payment processing.

Second, they’ve had to materially invest in Punchh. Punchh has a ton of features but support was under-invested and customers are looking for more complete solutions that capture non-loyalty data.

Third, PAR’s ARR isn’t high enough to give it many options for major M&A. They still have $200M on the balance sheet but as a public company they need to grow at $25M ARR annually: that’s a tough feat in an industry where restaurants pay d*ck for f*ck.

Olo

Olo, founded almost 18 years ago as Go Mobo, was the first real phone ordering attempt for restaurants. After an absolutely painful stretch of time spent convincing restaurants that customer technology matters, they finally reached IPO status with a favorable COVID tailwind that literally made it illegal for some restaurants to conduct business any other way than online.

Now counting 83,000 restaurant rooftops as customers, Olo inarguably represents only chain locations. That’s because for the longest time Olo had a price minimum, and only larger groups could justify the cost. The reason for that was pretty simple: the cost to ingest menu data for a restaurant was the same whether you were 1 location or 100.

Olo acquired Omnivore as a way to start its move into POS and in-store commerce. They further acquired Wisely to offer marketing automation and CDP, and launched Olo Pay for online and instore commerce.

Olo’s biggest challenge is TAM.

SMB merchants are getting online ordering from their POS company, larger enterprise merchants build Olo internally (think Subway booting Olo), and as enterprise POS companies mature (see PAR above), online ordering is natively coming with the POS.

Because, truth be told, online ordering is not that hard to do.

It was 20 years ago, but today it’s not very complicated with cloud POS systems.

Now what?

Olo and PAR are on a collision course. Their ambitions, feature sets, and needs-to-grow by virtue of being public companies make it impossible to have two separate companies forever.

Truthfully Olo and PAR should have merged prior to Olo going public.

They could have figured out how to build an enterprise POS product for table service, really dominated restaurant payments and marketing, and had a much better outcome working together.

But that, as they say, is water under the bridge.

Here’s how we see things, visualized in a quick table with explanations to follow.

And here’s how to quickly read the table.

The Feature in the left column is currently being won by the Company in the middle column. The color of the Moat column determines how wide the moat is, with green being very narrow and red being wide. For example, POS (red) is the widest moat while the features in green have the smallest moat.

Now we’ll share our thoughts feature-by-feature

Back Office

Back office would normally be red, since it’s a complicated animal to build (though not still as bad as POS) but it earned an orange here because Olo could acquire something. In fact, what Olo could acquire would likely be more modern than PAR’s Data Central product.

Marketman, for example, is currently owned by PSG Equity. That by definition means it’s available for sale.

The same could be said for Restaurant 365, or Crunchtime, both of which are a bit older, however.

And since all of these are owned by PE funds, they’d be pretty expensive.

Hence the orange rating.

But right now, PAR has a back office system, and it’s been integrated into PAR’s sales and support machinery.

Regardless of an acquisition Olo might undertake, PAR has a 12-month implementation moat over Olo.

Customer Data Platform (CDP)

A CDP is a glorified database. The engineering complexity comes in storing the data in a performant and flexible way so that queries can be made both quickly and cheaply.

Olo acquired Wisely, giving it a CDP product.

CDP is ultimately much more useful than a loyalty product because it shines a light on the unknown customers, which for brick and mortar industries like retail are 80%+ of the customer base.

CDP also opens up a dangerous dialogue for loyalty: is your loyalty program even working? You need to understand the frequency and buying patterns of your non-loyalty guests.

PAR doesn’t have a CDP. And Punchh, it’s loyalty program, would need considerable work to get there.

However, PAR could acquire a CDP. Folding a CDP into PAR would be easier than Olo folding in a back office tool.

Olo’s winning this feature category, but the moat isn’t too terribly wide.

Loyalty

Through its acquisition of Punchh, PAR is beating Olo in loyalty.

And loyalty has a wider moat than CDP because of the offers platform that must be handled.

Loyalty is effectively:

  • A segmentation tool (what CDP does and what Olo already has)
  • A messaging/engagement tool (which is built into Wisely and something we’ll cover soon)
  • And an offers management platform (what Olo needs a company like Sparkfly to help with)

Punchh has a very robust set of features. It serves 60,000 rooftops and has been around for a long while.

Wisely’s marketing tools are relatively new, and while they likely have a better, more modern infrastructure than Punchh, they lack the features Punchh has for enterprise engagments.

Olo could acquire an offers platform to speed things up, and it’s a pretty non-trivial build.

Hence the orange moat in favor of PAR.

Market Automation

Olo beats PAR on marketing automation because Wisely, as a CDP, can do more than push to email and text of known customers.

Olo can push contacts to paid media sources (think Google, Facebook, etc.).

PAR could acquire these features in a CDP, or build them (assuming they were prioritized).

Acquiring these capabilities isn’t as hard as Olo building offer management.

But for now, Olo is winning this feature set.

Online Ordering

If we’re Olo, this is what we’re most concerned about:

Our core value prop has no real moat.

POS companies offer what Olo does (and more, actually) in SMB market segments.

PAR acquired MENU. And while it’s a few quarters behind Olo in terms of features (mostly just third party integrations), the tool can replace Olo pretty seamlessly.

Hell, even POS companies like Qu are able to natively replicate 90% of Olo.

Olo’s moat on their core feature boils down to two things:

  1. Rolodex
  2. Multi-year contracts

PAR, however, has nearly has many rooftops as Olo.

If they were smart, they’d keep tabs on every single Olo contract at mutual customers and undercut Olo on pricing at renewal time, themselves locking up 4-year terms.

Olo is known as the enterprise online ordering provider, but there’s no moat here anymore.

Payments

Another moatless feature is payments processing.

Olo has the edge because they’re offering a more modern platform than PAR (though it’s probably more expensive as a consequence), but payments are easy to rip and replace in card not present situations.

Card present is a little trickier due to the expensive hardware components.

Olo started with ecomm payments (makes sense) but now has an aggressive card present push.

There’s a great story to tell here regarding payment data for customer identification, and we think Olo is telling that story much better than PAR.

Not surprisingly you see Olo picking up many more payments customers than PAR.

Olo has an edge, but it’s a very small edge.

If PAR could get a consistent positioning around payments + data, both would be on equal footing.

Point of Sale

Last but most important is that damn POS.

POS is hard.

Not just because of feature requirements (which are never ending) but because of the installation and support infrastructure necessary to pull it off.

This is actually why the moat is red.

Yes, the development sucks, but fuck does the implementation and support suck even more.

And while Olo acquired Omnivore to help it build a POS, it’s got a long way to go.

We get the idea that “every customer has a POS in their pocket” but we’re 20+ years away from that reality.

Restaurants move more slowly than glaciers.

Even if every restaurant said that they wanted to get rid of all their hardware and let POS become a node were talking decades of physical services work to make that happen.

This is the biggest feature moat on the board, and PAR knows they own it.

Here’s how we think it falls apart, though.

Toast wants to build everything. They bought a drive through piece of technology so they could upgrade their POS to support limited service enterprise restaurants and grab a customer base they didn’t have.

Once Toast has a few enterprise wins under their belts, they’d be more inclined to buy Olo than PAR for the enterprise relationships.

PAR’s product suite has too much overlap with Toast.

Olo would seem to offer more synergies.

But for $1B, maybe Toast decides to just hire the 20 best enterprise sales reps for $20M a year and buy their way into accounts.

That would be cheaper than splashing $1B.

PAR and Olo can fight with each other today, but it’s just a layover until Toast wins the market.


More POS Posts

Are robot waiters the future of the restaurant industry?

robot waiters restaurants

Robot Waiters For Restaurants

Nice video on future of robot waiters in restaurant industry.  We also liked post covering the rise of robots in NYC. They are being used in several ways there. Will have to check them out when we go to NRF in JanuaryLink to NY story.

Writeup

The restaurant industry is on the verge of a significant transformation with the introduction of robot waiters. These automated assistants are poised to boost efficiency, streamline operations, and elevate customer experiences. Thanks to the latest technological advancements, robot waiters are becoming increasingly sophisticated and adaptable, capable of performing a wide range of tasks.

One of the most noteworthy advantages of robot waiters is their ability to boost efficiency. They can navigate through crowded spaces, carry multiple trays of food and drinks, and deliver orders accurately and quickly. This helps minimize human error and frees up human staff to focus on more complex tasks, such as providing personalized service and engaging with customers.

Additionally, robot waiters can contribute significantly to the hygiene and safety of restaurants. By reducing direct contact between staff and food, they minimize the risk of contamination. Furthermore, they can be programmed to adhere strictly to sanitation protocols, ensuring consistent adherence to health and safety standards.

Robot waiters can also create a unique and futuristic ambiance in restaurants, enhancing the overall customer experience. Their appealing aesthetics and interactive features can captivate and entertain diners while offering multilingual capabilities that enable seamless communication with customers from diverse backgrounds.

Although the introduction of robot waiters may trigger concerns about job displacement, it’s worth noting that they are not intended to replace human staff entirely. Instead, they can complement existing staff, allowing them to focus on more specialized tasks while improving overall efficiency.

In conclusion, the future of robot waiters in the restaurant industry holds the promise of increased efficiency, improved hygiene, and elevated customer experiences. As technology continues to evolve, we can expect to see more innovative and adaptable robot waiters contributing to the evolution of the dining experience.le robot waiters contributing to the evolution of the dining experience.

Retail’s Problems Were Solved. So Why Still The Problem?

retail problems

Retail Problems That Have Persisted (and why)

We’re a big fan of Jordan at ReformingRetail.com — if you don’t subscribe you should.  He can be a bit too radical but that is preferred to not saying what needs to be said.  We liked his analysis of the latest NCR financial report we republished (with permission) on Kioskindustry.org

His latest on retail is very informative and it identifies the pre-eminent and seemingly indestructible characteristic of the retail establishment in being unwilling to actually fix problems they already know how to fix.  If it sounds like we are headed in the direction of money and specific spending, we are.  Retailers have no problem “spending” on glossy PR-ready initiatives that get their picture published and interview written up.  The successful and effective projects have always been protected and never disclosed as they really would help their competitors.


Most outsiders scratch their heads when getting into retail.

“How is that still a problem in retail? That was solved 84 years ago in XYZ vertical.”

This dangerously leads to thinking that solving that problem, since its ROI is so proven, is just a matter of education.

“It’s so obvious… there are millions of retailers, the ROI is clear, and it’s already been done before elsewhere. Gimme moneez.”

There have never been more wasted dollars than there have been in chasing this line of thinking in retail.

You need to understand the concept of Chesterton’s fence, which says that before making a change, understand why those changes don’t yet exist.

This is the dilemma for retail.

Sans ecommerce, which is killing the incumbent retailers that can’t innovate, retail has made trivial progress relative to other industries, and it will continue to fall further behind until there’s an impossibly large demographic shift in the types of people who run and manage retail establishments.

And “demographics” is a cute euphemism for intelligence.

Let’s list the common problems we hear in retail.

  1. We can’t control labor costs
  2. We can’t control inventory costs
  3. We don’t know how to run marketing
  4. We don’t know if marketing works

The math on forecasting has gotten incredibly good.

Tools like PredictHQ aggregate localized event data to understand demand drivers.

Every cloud provider now offers machine learning forecasting models.

Cloud POS systems enable easy reconciliation on quantities ordered and required servers.

Machine vision tools are staying on top of inventory levels.

Great excuses, but solutions exist.

Next we get to hear gripes about marketing frustrations.

Virtually every consumer is trackable by their credit card.

Targeting people based upon their purchase history is no longer an issue.

Furthermore, probabilistically determining campaign ROI is not a challenge either: probability density function at 1-1 records then further comparing this against competitors and their spend is knowable.

All this shit has been solved.

So why don’t retailers use it?

Because they refuse to pay for value.

Retailers really struggle to understand ROI.

So the only way to make money in retail is to take dollars from retailers in payments fees or through hostage-like monopolies.

That’s because there’s a massive asymmetry in value in retail:

Retail vendors must produce unreasonable ROIs.

Not a 3:1 or 4:1 ROI, but a 1,000:1 ROI.

Google or Facebook ads charge ~25% of the value generated, but a tool that increases a retailer’s EBITDA by 50%? That should be free according to retailers.

Here’s an honest-to-God conversation that happens between retailers and potential vendors.

Vendor: Invests years on expensive data science and product: I can tell you what’s wrong with your business and what it’s worth to fix it. It will make/save you $X over the next 3 months.

Retailer: It’s not actionable enough. I need quick advice.

Vendor: Then why do you have employees? Aren’t they being paid to make these changes?

RetailerSays a lot of nonsense and vendor realizes that nobody on the retailer’s payroll, including the c suite, is smart enough to make rational decisions

Vendor: Invests further in making solution actionable. Here: this is precisely what you have to do.

Retailer: No, no. You need to implement the solution automatically for me.

Vendor: And you’ll pay what for these services?

Retailer: Nothing.

Vendor: Okay we’ll run a pilot. Pilot generates 20% sales lift. Okay I generated $100,000 in new sales. Pay me 25%. How did I come up with this fee? You pay Google for an implied 4:1 ROAS even though you can’t and don’t measure any of it.

RetailerGlosses over the fact that they didn’t graduate high school because algebra was #fakenews. All these customers were going to come to me anyway. I earned all $100,000 on my own. I know all about this fancy “data science” and pretty much have 17 PhDs.

This graphic shows how ridiculous this really is.

The vendor, represented in green, is constantly moving around the wheel trying to innovate while the retailer, in red, looks for every possible reason to avoid improvement.

It’s a total waste of time.

Why put yourself through this hassle?

It would seem to us that smart vendors haven’t.

Look at the links we posted above.

PredictHQ is powering solutions for a ton of tech companies.

Those AI forecasting libraries are being used by people who can spell AI (i.e. not retailers).

Machine vision for inventory? Try every industry BUT retail that’s using it: healthcare, manufacturers, distributors, ecommerce (not part of legacy retail).

There are plenty of other industries that not only pay for value, but are grateful for your assistance.

Retail “executives” don’t have the self-awareness to understand that a 22 year old in finance makes more money they do because the free market says they’re more valuable.

Maybe instead of pushing these vendors out you should try to learn something from them?

Heaven forbid someone with an IQ above 75 points might know something you don’t.

Retailers have no excuse for their problems.

In fact, they are the reason for their problems.

But then again if retailers behaved rationally we wouldn’t have Dunning-Kruger train wrecks that make us question the longevity of the human species.

At least retail is giving us entertainment value.

Retail Automation News – August 26

Most recent stories in Automated Retail

Foodservice Innovation Zone NRF

Foodservice Innovation Zone

The Kiosk Association is an official sponsor for the upcoming Foodservice Innovation Zone being produced at NRF 2024.  We are exhibiting in the main show at 1602 (entrance lower level).

The retail, grocery, convenience and restaurant industries are constantly innovating to meet consumer expectations and stay ahead of the latest trends. Adding dining and upscale foodservice has become a focus for retailers as they seek to increase consumer dwell time and sales. Whether it’s full-service dining, fresh gourmet food or a pre-ordered meal, how food is “delivered” and experienced continues to evolve.
At NRF 2024: Retail’s Big Show, attendees will step into the future at the Foodservice Innovation Zone, an interactive exploration of the technologies and innovations that are transforming the customer foodservice experience.

This interactive experience will feature:
  • 50+ food tech-focused booths
  • A stage with sessions led by industry leaders and innovators
  • Celebrity chef appearances
  • Six immersive activations that put you hands-on with the technologies and innovations necessary to provide a future-forward customer-centric restaurant and retail foodservice experience

Technology so good you can taste it

The expanded Foodservice Innovation Zone features new immersive activations created by collaborations between retailers and their solution partners.
Activations will consist of:

  • Center of the Plate/Restaurant Tech
  • Convenience Store
  • Non-Traditional Foodservice/Grab & Go
  • Vending
  • Drive-Thru
  • Robotics
  • Command Center

These future-forward activations will let you experience the customer journey and show you how to transform your front and back-of-house operations.

VIEW FLOORPLAN

SPONSOR OPPORTUNITIES

FOOD RETAILERS REPRESENTED AT NRF 2023

PARTICIPATE IN AN ACTIVATION – APPLY TODAY

More Links

More Posts

Video

AI Assist Driving Revenue and Profit

Article on retailtouchpoints July 10th on AI and Retail.

Quick Brief / Summary

  • AI is coming
  • Retailers exploring and new startups like Verneek have formed. We’ve covered Verneek and their terrific pilot they finished with Sprouts. Very successful.
  • They include some nice data predictions — Global ecommerce sales, representing 22% of all retail sales, could increase to $5.4 trillion in 2026, from $3.3 trillion today, according to Morgan Stanley.
  • Four Areas Most Likely to “Bear Fruit”
    • Hyper-personalized shopping. For example, Verneek has the Quin Shopping AI. Quin helps shoppers make better and faster decisions throughout their online or in-store journeys — fulfilling any sophisticated shopping request — ranging from finding available product assortments or recipes that match a whole suite of health- or budget-related constraints — to general health and customer service. It lets you search both ways simultaneously for products “are” and “are not”
    • Automated catalog and product descriptions
    • Automatic price optimization
    • Assistive customer service.  Anyone else noticed how customer service has basically gone to the dogs since real people that understand and can be understood went away?

NVIDIA has its toolkit for AI and has been pushing its avatar AI. While not as creepy looking as earlier iterations, it still lacks texture and depth and is hampered by an AI that periodically doesn’t know what to say.

The nicest feature of NVIDIA we think is the ability to instantly speak in 20 different languages. If you have ever watched Star Trek you have seen the Universal Translator.

At the recent National Restaurant Show we had AI Restaurant Ordering via Avatar in our booth. SapientX.

AI Assist Resources

Author Info

As VP of Retail, Consumer Product Goods and Quick Service Restaurants at NVIDIA, Azita Martin leads the Retail team. She is responsible for global go-to-market strategy in the vertical. She advises senior executives on best practices of leveraging AI to improve operational efficiencies and identify new revenue streams. Prior to NVIDIA, Martin was the Chief Marketing Officer at Maana, an AI software platform used by industrial companies to accelerate building AI applications. Martin has been working with the Chief Digital Officers and heads of analytics/AI of Fortune 500 industrial companies and is intimately familiar with the top AI use cases that are demonstrating business value.

Related AI Assist Posts

Cheap Kiosk — Why It Ends Up Costing More

Off The Shelf Computers as Public Facing aka Cheap Kiosks

john ruskinOver the years self service has always been on the knifes-edge for cost versus benefit.   You can get cheap components versus quality.  Privacy filters have a wide range of price and quality and proven performance.  Too often a customer is budget-constrained and “goes cheap”. What usually happens is that given the long cycle of self-service they end up replacing the cheap, usually in tandem with a $200 service call.  I always like the John Ruskin quote.

We’ve been running into what we call ad-hoc or ala carte use of computers in an attempt to provide self-service to customers.  Providing self-service is a terrific goal, customers deserve multiple channels to do their business. It can be Point-Of-Sale, Telehealth or any form of check-in/check-out. Some verticals like healthcare have considerations over and above POS.

We’ve got images of POS situations using discrete components and calling it self-service. There are many disadvantages and almost no advantages (if you exclude lowest upfront cost and time factor).  Easy to go to Amazon and find something, or catch a sale at Dell or HP.

We will start with the computer terminal on countertop

Advantages

    1. You can get one very cheap
    2. Speed of delivery is overnight if you like

Disadvantages

    • The vendor rarely has any experience with self-service
    • Customer has to wonder if it’s a kiosk or some part of in-house POS
    • New standards can invalidate your solution. We work with U.S. Access Board and new standards for kiosks are coming out in December.
    • Usually easy to walk off with
    • Consumer grade touchscreen
    • Consumer grade computer
    • Consumer grade O/S
    • Medium and longterm cost is higher
    • Liability is higher (check with legal department)
    • Generally a shorter lifecycle than what they tell you
    • Adding devices is problematic at best
    • Privacy and data issues (via hacking or physical theft)
    • Privacy screens usually not provided
    • Healthcare iterations have stringent ADA requirements. Adding an Storm Audiopad “adhoc” does not necessarily mean ADA compliance.
    • If so typically it’s an add on/clipon which quickly gets picked on and looks pretty bad
    • Added devices are usually hard to find or get moved and then are hard to find
    • Added devices are much easier to walk off with
    • Added devices are referred to as “warts” because that is what they are
    • Some devices are not designed for use in adhoc position (Audiopad would be one for example)
    • Is it ADA — I doubt Amazon or Dell will advise you of ADA or ABA requirements
    • You usually do your own branding sign if you are intent on really going cheap (see picture)
    • The one on the right is dangerously close to being in violation of PCI regs
    • Ad hoc computers generally are easier to hack and steal information (publicly accessible ports biggest problem)
    • Cable management issues
    • Maintenance issues down the road
    • Multiple service points and contacts
    • Extended warranties are rare
    • User experience – projecting a “we went cheap” with ad-hoc solution doesn’t inspire confidence

Now For A Kiosk

Advantages

  • The vendor has likely 30 years of experience in self-service
  • Purpose-built and purpose designed with experience
  • Experienced vendors know what is coming with new standards (U.S. Access Board upcoming)
  • Its appearance communicates your experience in positive manner
  • All the components are secure
  • Commercial grade touchscreen
  • Commercial grade computer
  • Commercial grade OS
  • You can add components easily
  • You have one stop for support
  • Liability is lower (check with legal department)
  • Sometimes software applications will have “qualified” self-service iterations that they will support (e.g. Epic)
  • Privacy and data issues are mitigated to a very large extent
  • No cable management
  • Maintenance and service is generally one-stop
  • Extended warranties are usually available for up to five years

Disadvantages

  • Probably have to wait 6 weeks
  • Initially, the upfront cost is higher

Pictures

We keep a gallery of image for “Not The Best Idea” up on Pinterest

Here are a couple of samples

 

NCR Kiosks, Grubbrr and Toast POS — Analyst Review

NCR Kiosks and Digital Signage

We read an interesting analysis of a recent shareholder meeting NCR held which encompassed kiosks (we have to think any new ones are via GRUBBRR kiosks and Samsung) and for the first time, digital menu boards.  We have covered NCR in other related financial and SCO-related articles like Aloha Outage attackNew Lowes SCO. and Amazon Self Checkout Whole Foods.

We subscribe to ReformingRetail and definitely recommend subscribing for getting an additional point of view.

At the end of this reprint (thanks RR), we’ve included a “bonus” section on Toast and its sudden reversal and removal of the imposed order fee.  Restaurants are quick to change providers and actions by Toast could well accelerate that (from them to someone else, or to someone else but not Toast).



NCR is splitting its company up after it failed to find a suitor.

Because, really, who wants to own a turd?

Dung beetles don’t often become private equity managers (PE’s are more likely to be sharks than anything).

As we piece through NCR’s Q1 2023 earnings call we can’t help but see all the red flags in the business.

In order if discussion:

NCR delivered 1% YoY growth, or 4% if you like currency manipulations .

Inflation over the past year averaged 7%. So NCR can’t even match inflation?

God, how bad are things over there…

We continue to have success transitioning from onetime perpetual sales into multiyear subscription-based revenue stream. The nature of these contracts shifted $60 million of high profit revenue from what would have been previously recognized upfront to recurring revenue that will convert over the next several years.

Tim Oliver, CFO

This is a great cop-out for lower revenue numbers, but the question we have is NEW revenue: how much of this revenue is expansion vs new?

Because everywhere we look NCR is bleeding marketshare.

Then Tim comes back to brag that, if not for a strong dollar and a “success transitioning from onetime perpetual sales into multiyear subscription-based revenue stream” NCR’s revenue would have been up 7%.

Which is par with inflation.

NCR is focused on free cash flow.

Why?

It has an enormous mountain of debt to service.

NCR generated $209 million in free cash flow in the quarter…

Over the past two quarters, we have generated over $400 million of free cash flow, allowing us to reduce financial leverage ahead of the separation.

Mike Hayford, CEO

Back in October, we described our desire to generate at least $500 million of free cash flow before the separation transaction to reduce our financial leverage. In the first two quarters, of those $500 million, we’ve already generated $400 million of that bogey.

Tim Oliver

NCR has been cutting labor to hit these goals and pay their debts.

Just so long as management doesn’t take a pay cut.

NCR retail wins are a joke

NCR is rolling out more self-ordering kiosks to existing customers.

That’s it.

No talk about winning new POS business or any other meaningful metrics.

In retail, we continue to deliver on our strategy to be the retail platform company of choice. During the first quarter, NCR expanded its relationship with the second biggest retailer in the U.K. The customer committed to increasing the number of NCR self-checkout units while also signing a special services agreement to a multiyear subscription model to help transform their in-store solutions.

Mike Hayford

We get further hints to NCR’s retail struggles in Tim’s comments on retail lanes:

We increased our number of platform lanes by 33,000 lanes or 125% year over year. At the time of conversion, platform lanes drives an incremental $400 of ARR for an increase of $12 million versus last year. The platform lane increase was driven by rollouts in major convenience and fuel customers.

While platform lanes currently represent less than 5% of our total lanes, we see accelerating momentum for the conversion of our traditional lanes and have a substantial lane conversion backlog. And once on the platform, the opportunity to upsell and cross-sell new features and functionality drives further ARPU expansion.

Tim Oliver

So self-checkout revenues are flat and you’ve only penetrated 5% of your customer base with your newer lanes?

Hospitality is a disaster

NCR mentions useless metrics as if we aren’t smart enough to know any better.

In SMB, our payment attachment for new customers remained roughly 90%, driving a 50% increase of payment site. In enterprise, we expanded our relationship with the world’s largest food — fast-food chain to be the sole provider for digital menu boards in the U.S.

Mike Hayford

NCR should have 100% payments attach rates. What 10% are they losing on payments?

Then their big enterprise “win” was a company using NCR for… drumroll…

digital menu boards.

How often has NCR ever talked about digital menu boards as a successful line of business?

The answer: never.

Because it’s a line of business nobody wants to be in.

Commoditized hardware, very little software, and terrible margins.

Mom: how did you do on your test?

NCR: Oh! I failed! I got the lowest score in the class!

Mom: …

NCR: well the class snake couldn’t even write his name on the test

Mom: oh wow, I am so impressed that you beat the snake! Let me increase your allowance for being so awesome even though you underperfomed every other fucking mammal in the room

Given NCR’s anemic performance we’d bet the 6% YoY revenue increase in hospitality is coming exclusively from payments attach rates.

Hospitality revenue increased $12 million or 6% year over year as reported and 7% adjusting for currency, driven by an increase in services and software revenue, including cloud services and payment processing.

Tim Oliver

And once again, we get no indication on NEW sites: just an increase in “platform sites” which is a creative euphemism to avoid saying the obvious:

What’s interesting are the payments margins, which NCR pegs at $4,000 per year.

For a merchant doing $1M in GPV, this would be 40 bps of margin.

Great for NCR, not great for merchants.

Might as well fork over the extra 15 bps (and a $1 fee to each online ordering customer) and get a way better POS technology in Toast.

Digital Banking has a business model problem

The only growth in NCR’s digital banking business came from an increase in user seats.

Digital banking revenue was flat year over year. The two-thirds of our revenue that is driven by user count increased in this quarter on higher used accounts and led to higher recurring revenue.

This increase was offset, however, by lower nonrecurring revenue that can be lumpy. Adjusted EBITDA was down 13% year over year…

Tim Oliver

Bro, you heard of this thing called AI?

Banks are going to be doing more with less.

Expect the seat count to come down over the next few years as white collar establishments like banks adopt AI.

ATMs are dead

NCR is switching their ATM business model to as-a-service for a recurring revenue component.

Whatever.

Their growth is coming primarily from international markets – in particular India – where we have concerns of cash displacement.

ATM-as-a-Service units increased 293% year over year to 17,000 units. We experienced significant growth in India and incremental growth in the United States.

Tim Oliver

Ever heard of this thing called UPI?

It’s the global case study for how to enable digital account-to-account transfers and it just so happens to be in India.

UPI’s growth is compounding 50% annually and it represents 40% of all payments.

BCG expects UPI to triple to $10T of transactions by 2026, meaning cash will be dying.

In a span of just six years, India, primarily a cash-based economy, now leads the world in real-time digital payments, accounting for almost 40 per cent of all such transactions.

The mass adoption of UPI during the COVID-19 pandemic has extended far beyond the urban to even rural India, an effect that left the experts in amazement.

As the success of the UPI grows, so does its attractiveness and acceptance by other countries; for instance, on February 21, 2023, India and Singapore launched cross-border connectivity between UPI and its equivalent in Singapore called PayNow, enabling low-cost and faster cross-border transactions.

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/finance/indias-digital-payments-market-will-more-than-triple-to-10-trillion-by-2026-report/articleshow/98522718.cms?from=mdr

LOL NCR.

Then you’ve got this more direct and recent analogue of Diebold Nixdorf, NCR’s ATM competitor, declaring bankruptcy.

Diebold has struggled with debt since it acquired Germany-based Wincor Nixdorf AG for $1.8 billion in 2016. After taking on significant debt in that deal, the newly-combined company faced flat or declining sales in its core business of selling ATMs to banks and checkout machines to retail customers.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/atm-maker-diebold-nixdorf-files-bankruptcy-cut-2-bln-debt-2023-06-01/

Too much debt, shitty business model, terrible execution.

Remind you of anyone?


BONUS

TOAST POS

Full Article and below is Excerpt

We were told Clover suspended its ordering fee indefinitely, but being a payments company they haven’t bothered to supply any definitive declaration.

While Toast merchants might be celebrating this in the short term, hear us clearly:

Toast lacks all vestiges of anything resembling morality, and Toast merchants will pay for this shortfall.

What transpired with the $0.99 fee was but a brief taste of what those of us in the industry already know: Toast is truly a monster.

Toast merchants by and large have no idea what the hell is going on and the pushback on Toast’s fee was from a very small percentage of Toast merchants who bothered to (probably accidentally) read an email from Toast.

The problem for Toast merchants now is that Toast is on track to lose $300M this year.

Precisely the amount of revenue the fee would close.

Toast cannot sustain this rate of losses for more than 3 more years before they have to shore up the balance sheet.

Frankly, we’re curious to see how Toast takes this learning to pummel merchants on payments.

We bet that within a year Toast will find a way to make the revenue through direct merchant fees, likely mandating the $0.99 fee but letting the merchants make the call on eating it.

Why did Toast drop the fee?

Not because merchants pushed back.

And probably not because President Biden has made comment on the frustration with unscrupulous fees, even though next year is an election year and this might mean that the FTC takes a closer look.

Sure, some state representatives are taking interest, but honestly only a very small number of Toast merchants will even notice, and even fewer of those can do math.

The legitimate concern, however, relates to taxation:

Toast restaurants are required to recognize the revenue of these fees and remit taxes against such revenue, but they’re not seeing any of the revenue to offset the taxes.

Let’s do the math to show you how bad this is.

A merchant doing $1M a year does $200,000 in digital native orders, or 20%, and that might be conservative.

At a $30 average check, that’s 6,600 checks, or $6,600 in revenue at a dollar fee per order.

Well, now the merchant now has to pay taxes on that $6,600.

What percent of the merchant’s margins were just eroded in additional taxes?

And what happens when a customer wants a refund?

Is Toast managing that?

Who reports changes to the tax authorities?

Does this complication give governments the impetus to directly integrate to POS software like they do in Europe (so that the authorities can audit the taxes due)?

This was going to be a real compliance headache and it puts a target right on the backs of Toast merchants.

We don’t think Toast wanted this exposure in this manner.

AI Assisting Retail with Revenue

AI

AI Useful Results for Retailers

Article on retailtouchpoints July 10th on AI and Retail.

Quick Brief / Summary

  • AI is coming
  • Retailers exploring and new startups like Verneek have formed. We’ve covered Verneek and their terrific pilot they finished with Sprouts. Very successful.
  • They include some nice data predictions — Global ecommerce sales, representing 22% of all retail sales, could increase to $5.4 trillion in 2026, from $3.3 trillion today, according to Morgan Stanley.
  • Four Areas Most Likely to “Bear Fruit”
    • Hyper-personalized shopping. For example, Verneek has the Quin Shopping AI. Quin helps shoppers make better and faster decisions throughout their online or in-store journeys — fulfilling any sophisticated shopping request — ranging from finding available product assortments or recipes that match a whole suite of health- or budget-related constraints — to general health and customer service. It lets you search both ways simultaneously for products “are” and “are not”
    • Automated catalog and product descriptions
    • Automatic price optimization
    • Assistive customer service.  Anyone else noticed how customer service has basically gone to the dogs since real people that understand and can be understood went away?

NVIDIA has its toolkit for AI and has been pushing its avatar AI. While not as creepy looking as earlier iterations, it still lacks texture and depth and is hampered by an AI that periodically doesn’t know what to say.

The nicest feature of NVIDIA we think is the ability to instantly speak in 20 different languages. If you have ever watched Star Trek you have seen the Universal Translator.

At the recent National Restaurant Show we had AI Restaurant Ordering via Avatar in our booth. SapientX.

AI Assist Resources

Author Info

As VP of Retail, Consumer Product Goods and Quick Service Restaurants at NVIDIA, Azita Martin leads the Retail team. She is responsible for global go-to-market strategy in the vertical. She advises senior executives on best practices of leveraging AI to improve operational efficiencies and identify new revenue streams. Prior to NVIDIA, Martin was the Chief Marketing Officer at Maana, an AI software platform used by industrial companies to accelerate building AI applications. Martin has been working with the Chief Digital Officers and heads of analytics/AI of Fortune 500 industrial companies and is intimately familiar with the top AI use cases that are demonstrating business value.

Related AI Assist Posts

Conversational AI With Voice That You Speak With

conversational AI voice

Conversational AI Voice

Good conversation with Verneek. Their conversational AI has been deployed in supermarket for 70+ days and getting feedback.  Very impressive since dynamically generated answers are on the table and not picking from a stock stable.

The shopper scans a barcode and then conducts voice conversation with AI.

  • No downloading of yet another app
  • no typing, purely voice (but not exclusively)
  • Multiple conditions don’t scare the AI
  • No creepy avatar
  • Mobile is required but stationary shopping stations (with print) would be an option with kiosks
  • On tap the ability to preset negative factors (never show me high sugar or high fructose for example)
  • Can suggest “related deals” much like Amazon does.
  • All in all, super-impressed with this first generation

Video

 

Example Questions

One Quin can instantaneously answer any sophisticated question or address requests inside a given digital environment.
Inside a food shopping experience, for instance, consumers can ask:

Where can I find the healthiest dip you carry? No dairy, please! and only ratings higher than 4.

I am going vegan. Let’s add to my shopping list a high-protein snack without bad ingredients, costing under $2.

One Quin is able to provide the type of AI support that is unavailable on Amazon’s Alexa, Apple’s Siri, Google Search, or OpenAI’s ChatGPT.

About Verneek