Orange: Read&Go

Thomas R. Eisenmann; Toby E. Stuart; Bhaskar  Chakravorti; Vincent Marie Dessain; Simon  Harrow; Elena  Corsi

Case | HBS Case Collection | February 2009 (Revised May 2010)

Orange: Read&Go

by Thomas R. Eisenmann, Toby E. Stuart, Bhaskar Chakravorti, Vincent Marie Dessain, Simon Harrow and Elena Corsi

Abstract

In late 2008, Orange (aka France Telecom) must decide if launching Read&Go, an electronic newsstand built around an e-paper reader, would be successful. The case describes (1) Orange's strategy; (2) the company's new product development process; (3) e-paper technology, which simulates the appearance of printed paper on a screen; (4) consumer demand for e-paper services; (5) potential competitors, including Amazon's Kindle; (6) business model options for Orange's service; and (7) the reactions of French newspapers-crucial content partners-to Orange's proposal.

Keywords: Business Model; Corporate Entrepreneurship; Technological Innovation; Demand and Consumers; Product Development; Partners and Partnerships; Competition; Publishing Industry; France;

Format: Print

29 pages

Find at Harvard

Citation:

Eisenmann, Thomas R., Toby E. Stuart, Bhaskar Chakravorti, Vincent Marie Dessain, Simon Harrow, and Elena Corsi. "Orange: Read&Go." Harvard Business School Case 809-122, February 2009. (Revised May 2010.)

Explains how to identify and capitalize upon marketplace design opportunities. Defines markets and marketplaces and describes the basic functions of each. Discusses attributes (e.g., heterogeneity of participants' preferences and asymmetry in available information) that determine whether and how marketplaces create value. Explains common causes of market failure; presents a framework for designing marketplaces in response. Discusses tactics for building trust and liquidity when launching new marketplaces, as well as challenges encountered as marketplaces mature (e.g., congestion and disintermediation).

In 2017, management at Shift, an online marketplace that uses a “high touch,” concierge approach to buy and sell used cars, was formulating plans for the San Francisco-based startup’s next phase of expansion. One option was to preserve Shift’s current business model and grow through geographic expansion. Another option was to decentralize more tasks to sellers and/or buyers, for example, management of inspections and repairs. While decentralizing tasks would reduce Shift’s labor per transaction and thereby improve the venture’s unit economics and its scalability, Shift might risk undermining users’ trust by handing off responsibility for critical tasks.

Faculty & Research

Orange: Read&Go

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author