This book invites us to ask, “Through whom should we buy, invest and give?”
A deeply informed view of middlemen, the benefits they offer and suggestions for how to keep them in check so they don’t screw everyone.
Overall, I was convinced that the supply chains of middlemen should be shortened and it’s possible to consciously choose where to spend and the conditions we can create for more direct exchanges to take hold. I particularly admire Judge’s stance that there are new ways to think about and create value coming from an abundant rather than combative perspective.
Having said that, some of the examples given of brands who attempt to be transparent, live up to higher standards, show that this stance can backfire on them (e.g. Everlane). This positioning potentially attracts virtue signalling power plays that the company is unable to control and which is unfairly detrimental to the brand.
Worth reading this alongside The Status Game to explore the pros and cons of direct relationships, and the human dynamics at play that could impact a brand, which this book doesn’t address.
Notes and references that were meaningful to me:
*Part I in a nutshell*
- Buy your nuts direct from the farmer
*Part II: benefits of not going direct*
- Unprecedented degree of choice and convenience (e.g. big box retailers and real estate agents)
- Benefit of financial securitisation: divvies up risk and information burdens
*Part III: the dark side of middlemen*
- The rise of the middleman economy comes at a steep price: lobbying and special interests causing uneven competitive playing field, unnecessary costs, rampant fraud, man on the street getting screwed
- Middlemen today influence behaviour, investment and consumption. Huge amounts of data are used to push people to buy more.
- Myth of supply chain accountability: e.g. inaccurate company ratings during the 2007 days of “shadow banking” subprime crisis. Short terms gains at the expense of simplicity, the strength of financial markets, economic activity and household wealth.
- The supposed efficiencies when times were good created excessive rigidities that hurt those involved and others when housing markets declined. Example of 2020 Covid-19 toilet paper panic buying: common vulnerability and supply chain challenges. Supply side inflation: due to shipping costs, delays in delivery, sudden jump in demand, lumber shortage, semiconductor shortage. Lack of mechanisms for holding executives accountable: easy to lie, no incentives to tell the truth, be ethical.
- The ignorance long supply chains can foster includes consumers: we know fast fashion often causes environmental waste and pain and suffering to sweatshop workers. But this doesn’t stop us buying. Middlemen shield buyers from the impact of their buying decisions which are abstract and probabilistic.
- Challenge of trying to promote more sustainable practices and better working conditions through long and complicated supply chains. Companies can game the system and middlemen profit from subterfuge.
—e.g. Certification schemes to assure fair trade. Consumer research recently showed Greek consumers were willing to pay 70% more for strawberries when assured that workers were treated and paid fairly. Coffee producers differentiate through organic and third party fair trade certification. However the significant costs of getting the certification wouldn’t give them a guarantee they could actually sell at a higher price. And one study found labourers were actually paid less. Mixed results.
— e.g. green bonds: Investors pay significant fees but not clear on impact. Does issuing a green bond impact result in environmental benefits? Proceeds usually comply (like restrictions for use and ongoing reporting). But looking at carbon footprint, they often offset the benefits through other actions. 2020 report from US Govt accountability office: no clear consistent ESG rules on what companies must disclose.
—more joy in connecting to farmers, makers and others
*Part IV: the way forward*
- Direct and the path forward: Direct exchange results in an ecosystem of makers and consumers, investors and entrepreneurs. Gift dynamics create emotional connections rather than commodity connections: can coexist. Can foster a society that recognises of our interdependence and our collective wellbeing rather than assumptions of scarcity. And individual advantage.
- E.g. direct tourism at Navarro Vineyards in California who hire workers all year round, go direct to customer at reasonable prices. Note to self to try this wine!
- E.g.2 Hanahana beauty shea based body butters for women of colour, sells exclusively on its website. Founded by woman of Ghanaian descent: Abena Boamah-Acheampong. Pays suppliers twice what they originally asked. Posting videos on women who make the shea.
- To transcend the limitations inherent in the still dominant economics-based mode of looking at the world we need a different theory of value of exchange: one that illuminates a different set of dynamics. See Lewis Hyde’s work on gift economies: in other places and times gifts have been a dominant mode of exchange. Gift economies can exist with market economies (albeit uncomfortably).
- Markets and market based interactions can promote human flourishing. Reference: The Third Pillar: How Markets and the State Leave the Community Behind
Book by Raghuram Rajan. We’re in a system that seeks to put a price on everything.
_“The one book I recommend without fail to aspiring writers and painters and musicians”: The Gift by Lewis Hyde_
- Margaret Atwood (2018)
- How gifts can cultivate community and connection even when intertwined with commerce e.g. The CSA at Genesis Farm, the share table. If I’m allowed more eggplants that my family can eat, I place the extra on the share table. Everything on the table is free for the taking. Annual carrot harvest participation, or auctions, or cook food at events. It’s also in person and personal: intimacy and sense you know the merchant.
- e.g. GoFundMe: conscious cultivation of connection and community: story of the person is at the centre, allows giver and receiver communication on and off the platform. Feels meaningful.
- Rework hierarchies, create meaningful and self-directed professional opportunities, reduce loneliness, sense of abundance from using exchange to connect with fellow humans
- Connections local and global: Direct exchange connects us, fostering community and helps promote a more just, resilient, and accountable economic system. It reveals “through whom” to buy, invest and give.
- Almost direct, quasi-direct and the limits of direct: e.g. P2P lending (Prosper: person to person marketplace for consumer loans. Harnessing wisdom of crowds to make loans available to more people at better price. But ended up having to essentially be regulated.)
- Example of CX funded D2C brands like Warby Parker, Dollar shave club, Casper, Rothy’s, glossié, also all bird shoes, away luggage, Harry’s razors, third love bras. Book: Billion Dollar Brand Club: How Dollar Shave Club, Warby Parker, and Other Disruptors Are Remaking What We Buy by Lawrence Ingrassia. They exploited weakness brought about by middlemen stifling innovation
- Pros and cons e.g.: Everlane
-- Pro: Everlane’s “radical transparency”: They break down what goes into the price of a product, where cashmere comes from, who they buy from, pictures of factory. Toured factory, spoke to workers. Cutting out middle man gives complete control over virtual and physical environment in which their customers shop, saves them money. Customer service queries go straight to an employee. Profits from Black Friday go to people employed in factories. Eliminating virgin plastics from supply chain. $50M in revenue within 5 years of founding, glowing reviews.
-- Con: 42 of 57 remote customer service reps fired after asking to unionise in depths of the pandemic. Anti-black disrespectful behaviour accusation. Incongruence between what they say and reality. Internal report showing it intentionally dragged its feet in catering to plus sizes (not aspirational to be fat). A lot is actually disguised: e.g. do workers enjoy sick leave?
- Cons E.g. Away: surveillance; Third Love Bras: bullying male boss; Dollar Shave Club: actually repackaged razors available on Amazon, now sells through traditional middlemen.
- “Tech giants are now a new middleman.”
- DTC is quasi direct because it relies on VC funding: Business and funding models limit the depth of relationships with customers. Unlike shareholders, VC’s can tell directors or leaders what to do: pressure them to grow very quickly, at all costs. When growth is rushed it can cause a company to compromise on other values.
- Platforms like eBay, Etsy and Kickstarter serve many of the economic functions long served by economic middlemen e.g. aggregated reviews and safe flow of money from one person to another.
- Example: Amazon marketplace: platforms grown faster than retail business, but a virtuous circle enabled it to amass so much power so quickly, leverage influence on sellers (know what fees to impose).
- The benefits that direct exchange and the shifts in that direction can offer are not equally helpful across all types of settings. Kickstarter enables multidimensional human beings seeking a multidimensional exchange to come to the table together, vs P2P which had nice stories but depersonalised, and the exchange is financial at its core, need to weed out fraud and assessing likelihood to repay.
- 5 principles for policy makers, companies and us:
1. Intermediation matters
2. The shorter the intermediation chain the better
3. Direct is best most of the time
4. Follow the fees to understand who to trust
5. Bridges can help