Good question, Gerald.
There's no inherent reason why PCLN has to limit its demand-collection model to "generics." Believe it's starting with this approach to work the kinks out of the system, protect vendors' standard distribution methods from cannibalization, and operate with a large inventory. Also, in the case of airline tickets, people generally don't care on which airline they fly, especially at a designated price. Presumably, the model can be "tweaked" with the click of a mouse.
PCLN's automobile business model is proof that the system supports very specific user configurations, including every trivial option.
So, gasoline could work either way. If brand were deemed important, it could be brand-specific. My guess is that gas isn't highly brand-sensitive; within reason, you don't much care (alas, "full service" long gone). Grade is a must-specify, as you need to select the right one. Once you get into a long-term supply contract (say, 1,000 gallons?) for a commodity, a lot of interesting things occur. The cost of money becomes an issue, along with the future price of the commodity. At that point, the whole system starts to resemble a futures market. Still, it's pretty clear that many consumers and certain suppliers would be willing to operate that way (or already do), including oil companies, long distance phone companies, finance sources, paper vendors, food producers, construction materials suppliers, you name it--even colleges! Terms of payment, including financing, can easily be designed into a given demand-collection program.
So PCLN's on the cusp of a massive opportunity to bring supply and demand into reasonable balance, especially in segments where inventory is commodity-price sensitive, inflation- or interest-rate sensitive, or "perishable." Anyone who fails to see this train coming risks getting run over. The game is PCLN's to lose.
BAM |
