The advantages and disadvantages of both can be considered from the following directions
1. Pricing strategy
2. Production costs
3. User demand coverage
4. Productivity
5. Operating costs
Pricing strategy
Mobike is 30min/ yuan, ofo 60min/ yuan (city). With the cycling speed of 150m/min, the radiation range of Mobike is 4.5km while ofo is 9km. However, from the perspective of commuting, there should be few cases where the cycling time exceeds 30min.
Deposit plan: 299 yuan for Mobike and 99 yuan for Ofo
Summary: Although ofo’s price is not obviously superior to Mobike’s in terms of billing scheme, ofo’s deposit scheme is more attractive than Mobike’s.
The cost of production
Mobike for their own production, the cost of each vehicle is about 3K yuan, unique structure and “strong” material, reduce the maintenance cost but also reduce the user experience (too heavy riding tired, no shock absorption easy egg breaking), with the improvement of the process and mass production, the production cost of vehicles will be likely to further decline.
Ofo’s urban-oriented bikes have updated designs (rotating bells, smaller wheels, solid tires, sealed axles, drum brakes…). If there are no accidents, this will lead to an increase in ofo’s production cost (perhaps the reason for the large damage rate during school).
Summary: Ofo should continue to hold an edge, but its lead over Mobike will narrow further
Vehicle demand coverage
Car demand can be roughly divided into two types:
1) Demand for vehicles in regular periods —– tests the scale of vehicle delivery
2) Demand for vehicles at peak hours —– tests resource allocation ability
Mobike bike basically only do the initial launch planning, Mobike bike resources are completely allocated by the market (within the scope of provisions), although Mobike can save operating costs, but corresponding to the peak is difficult to use the problem. (The reasons for this phenomenon are: one-way cycling, accidental demand….)
Ofo: introducing the concept of “stop”, parking layout in-use vehicle demand concentration areas (just focus decoration in the same place, no investment of equipment), each of the “stop” setting about ten or so Ofo: by artificial mixing in the point district every “parking” have enough car, in order to solve the difficulty in finding the car and car peak demand, this will increase the cost of a certain, of course
Summary: Although mobike’s approach to save the cost, but easy to cause the car peak, the vehicle is difficult to find the situation. Ofo’s artificial control of vehicles at “parking spots” increases operating costs, but it can cope with peak demand for vehicles near “parking spots”.
Production capacity
There is nothing more embarrassing than wanting to ride but not having a car nearby. Increasing vehicle delivery is the most direct and effective means, but factors such as capital, vehicle manufacturing cost, plant production capacity and operating cost need to be considered in production. In terms of market penetration, of course, whoever launches faster will have an advantage.
Summary: Ofo’s low-cost strategy and production model are clearly more dominant
Operating costs
1) Damage rate of bicycles
Even though Mobike is very “robust” in terms of configuration, ofo’s damage rate is nearly 10% during operation (in Shanghai).
2) Anti-theft
“If the vehicle can be stolen, it can be stolen, if not, it can be disassembly parts to sell, and if not, it can be taken to sell scrap iron.” The poor anti-theft of the vehicle is equivalent to giving the thief a red envelope (open the APP, it can also help you steal the car quickly).
3) Security of unlocking
If there’s a loophole in the lockpick system, it’s a disaster. (If the fixed password is cracked, there may be evasion of fees, private use of the bus, theft…)
4) Whether workers’ intervention is needed
In theory, there is no need for human intervention. However, In pursuit of better user experience, Ofo manually dispatches vehicles at “parking spots” in key areas.
Summary: Mobike almost beats mobike in terms of operating costs
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — update — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
What is the focus on pricing, cost, productivity
Why focus on pricing?
Pricing goes without saying. In the case of the same service content, price is the first driving force for users to make choices, as long as the purpose is to achieve user experience or relatively marginal needs.
Why so much focus on cost?
Because mobike and ofo: different from other Internet project, most of the Internet project can use the money move a large number of users, because of the developed product interoperability is very high, but the mobike and ofo: is not the same, the early needs a large number of fixed investment can promote the model run, and guest unit price is too small cost recovery slow, No matter how fast money is raised, it is easy to die without increasing source and reducing expenditure.
Why focus on productivity?
The production capacity of the manufacturer is related to the expansion ability of Mobike and Ofo, just like the ammunition supply of the front line, when the fierce battle is found to be out of bullets, then how to play? The Mobike is built by its own manufacturer, while Ofo buys it
The allocation of resources is to maximize the efficiency of limited resources. If money is not enough, thinking can alleviate the problem.
Access to didi, Uber and other travel platforms is excellent, but there is a prerequisite, that is, you need to be able to access. For example, Didi’s conditions for Ofo are that mobike and Ofo will have to fight it out before the white collar market orders stabilize at 1 million orders and the vehicle density is large enough. Eventually, mobike and Ofo will either merge or one of them will collapse first.