Points to note14 Jul 2020 10:19
With regards to charging fees there are a number of points to consider: 1) DISH are migrating to a SaaS model which means disabling the billing server and developing a new one; 2) everyone knows revenue is negligible and as such isn’t material at this point; 3) DISH want to generate as much goodwill as possible with restaurants to firstly bring existing partners back live and secondly whilst they fully develop the SaaS model generate goodwill and valuable feedback; and 3) they have stated that they have sufficient runway to the end of the year and did not assume any revenue generation into that assumption so the statement doesn’t need updating.
Costs go down with a SaaS model versus an aggregator model. For example the SaaS will give restaurants a white label of the technology on their own website and not just on the bigdish app.
Restaurants are in the driving seat with a SaaS to empower their customers to book a table or delivery or pick up via their site or bigdish. The SaaS places greater emphasis on the restaurants using the platform how they want to use it.
A great example in the USA is Chow Now. They have a SaaS delivery model. They have 14,000 restaurants and spend zero on marketing to consumers as they empower the restaurants to reach their customers in a way that they want too..Digest that last point again - 14,000 restaurants on Chow Now are paying a SaaS fee with zero consumer marketing paid for by Chow Now.
The change of strategy at DISH can simply come down to solving two problems - 1) restaurants have too many devices and platforms that they need to run their business and 2) consumers have different food apps for different things. SaaS and increasing functionality seeks to address these problems.
They have not abandoned yield management - it is still there but with greater flexibility without ‘forcing’ a restaurant to do something...“.... many apps within an umbrella app, as a complete dining solution”
Sign In
Follow the stocks
