spendmatters
 

May 21, 2012

 

Will Big Buyers and Accounts Payable (AP) Organizations Embrace Free E-Invoicing?

Tradeshift, an upstart electronic invoicing provider that delivers a free electronic invoicing service (and in the future plans to earn revenue off of offering additional services such as discounting/financing on top of its invoicing and supplier network), has won an important piece of business with a NHS shared services organization in the UK. According to the e-invoicing news from across the pond, "The Anglia Support Partnership (ASP), an NHS shared services organisation, is aiming to reduce operating costs through the introduction of an electronic invoicing service...ASP deals with more than 425,000 invoices every year, each of which has to be scanned or entered manually into its workflow system, in order to match invoices with purchase orders. However, it hopes to persuade suppliers to sign up for the Tradeshift service, a web-based business network that provides an electronic invoice service."

What's most curious about the news and competitive win for Tradeshift is that the NHS trust did not see a positive ROI by paying for such a service. A decision maker quoted in the article suggests that they "did a feasibility study, looking at other e-invoicing systems, but the [return on investment] wasn't significant enough for us." Findings such as this should capture the attention of companies like Ariba, Basware, OB10, Perfect, Hubwoo, Transcepta and just about all the other providers of electronic invoicing capabilities and related supplier networks, all of whom have predicated key aspects of their business model on charging either buyers or suppliers for invoice connectivity and related matching. In fact Tradeshift, along with Pagero and just a handful of others, are the exception and not the rule when it comes to providing a free or nominal cost e-invoicing service with the intent of making money off of other means focused on transactions.

For further information on the costs of various networks (including Ariba and others) and the impact of recent supplier fee increases, you can check out our recent analysis on the topic Ariba Network Price Hike: Plan for Increased Supplier Fees in September 2010. It's our view that the basic benefits of electronic invoicing should pay for themselves in enhanced compliance and automation (i.e., AP staff reduction) at the most basic level. Still, we believe that since the benefits disproportionately aid the buying organization (often at the expense of the supplier, based on current revenue schemes), that procurement and AP organizations should offset any cost impact for suppliers -- or absorb the costs directly. Regardless, even if we quibble with the logic behind the NHS decision regarding ROI, the move to a free solution by such a large buying and AP organizations could signal a shift in the e-invoicing market that we should all be aware of.

- Jason Busch


TweetBacks
Comments
Christian Lanng (Tradeshift)'s Gravatar As usually a well thought out post, Jason and an interesting discussion on customer ROI. Just two clarifications, the biggest strong point for ASP/NHS was not that Tradeshift was free for them (they are actually paying for some services), but that it was free for their suppliers. They did not feel they could justify the cost for their suppliers since the value was mostly on their side. I know this is a hotly debated topic, in many places but in reality we meet more and more customers who understand this and have it as a main requirement that their e-invoicing is completely free for their suppliers.

As for their own ROI, it's a little more complex than that just didn't want to pay, the fact is they felt there was little ROI in just getting e-invoices delivered to the door, but were looking for advanced services like the ability to subscribe to master data from their suppliers, so it was not a matter of not paying, but just that what really carried their business case home, was all the soft stuff, like integrated supply chain communication, master data subscription and so on and e-invoicing was not very valuable for them stand alone.

Hope that this help clarify.

Br

Christian Lanng
# Posted By Christian Lanng (Tradeshift) | 6/22/11 11:50 PM
howard@aol.com's Gravatar How many times do we need to say it - Free is not a real or long term business model. Period. So if you are planning on using a free services you better have plan B. Even charging a low amount of money is not long term sustainable (read: US Post Office in $8B hole). And personally I have to challenge anyone's analysis that says we can handle paper cheaper than doing it electronically. Either the have slave wages or very low volume making the breakeven point unrealistic for them.

I also wonder why this blog decided to bash Ariba again. They seem to be making money and the adding customers that do e-invoicing so is not the market the one who decides the winners and the losers?
# Posted By howard@aol.com | 6/23/11 7:46 AM
Whitey Bulgar's Gravatar Before I send my boys after you, read the analysis that is linked to in this post. This is one of the only sources of rigorous analysis available involving Ariba's price increase and e-invoicing fees in general. Making money is not necessarily the same as delivering buyer and supplier (i.e., customer -- in BOTH SENSES) value. You can acquire and arbitrage network revenue (Quadrem) and you can force network fees on new customers (SaaS P2P). But long-term, if you raise prices while others are lowering them or offering free services, the market will readjust your business accordingly.
# Posted By Whitey Bulgar | 6/23/11 8:03 AM
howard's Gravatar Whitey - You put a vig on everything from Southie to the North End. Now your against getting the same when people use your network? That time in Malibu really mellowed you out.
# Posted By howard | 6/23/11 3:52 PM
About Us | Advertising and Sponsorships | Advisory Services | Contact Us    © 2004-2012 Azul Partners, Inc. and Spend Matters. All Rights Reserved.