I originally wrote this as an assignment for my India Global Academic Travel Experience course at school after a 10+ day trip to the country in March, 2005. I got a good grade on the paper and I’m pretty proud of the writing so I’m posting it here for others to read. Enjoy.

The gleaming corporate campus of Infosys rivals the grounds of any country club in the United States, with swimming pools, a chipping green, and lush landscaping crossed by meandering walkways. After an introduction to the company and a walking tour of the campus, we were posed an interesting lunchtime choice: banana leaf or Domino’s? This question succinctly captures the underlying contrasts in a culture trying to find its place in the new global economy.

On the surface, the contrast of serving traditional foods on a banana leaf in the company cafeteria struck me as interesting. Here we were at arguably the most successful company in India on an ultra-modern campus, but we were eating with our hands from a leaf just as Indians had hundreds of years before. Young info-tech workers, many chatting in English, ate the meal just as their parents had, and their parents before them. Globalization to many evokes notions of Western imperialism and the death of local culture but in this setting the benefits of globalization seemed to coexist peacefully with a rich cultural heritage. Indeed, sprinkled amongst the crowd of blue jeans and t-shirts, women in Saris and men in more traditional Indian garb stood in stark contrast to the western idea of business casual. Looking beyond the surface, one finds contrasts more fundamental to the future direction of India as a part of the global economy.

Women occupy a unique position in Indian culture. In many respects, women are expected to be modest homemakers, a position not too different from women in the United States in the 1950s. One can see the women in the streets in India, modestly riding side-saddle on their husbands’ motorcycles or covered head-to-toe in Islamic burqas. But inside many Indian corporations, one finds Indian women in positions of authority rivaling those held by women in the west. Indeed, at each company we visited within India (with the exception of Standard Chartered Bank, whose lack of visible women is not surprising considering the number of women in the US banking industry) we met successful and confident Indian women doing jobs that would have been dominated by men just a few years before. India appears to be on the way to establishing itself as a world class meritocracy where individuals can rise to the highest levels of ability regardless of gender, and sets a great example for other developing countries around the world. For now it appears that the contrasts between traditional thinking about women’s roles and gender equity in India are able to peacefully coexist.

In stark contrast to the idea of peaceful coexistence, one notices the daily conflicts between the old and new in transportation and labor issues around India. Overloaded oxen and human powered carts attempt to share the roadways with taxis, busses, and large trucks on a daily basis in India, leading to crippling traffic jams and dangerous lives for all involved. Construction projects appear to drag on ad infinitum as men and women carry rocks and gravel in small pans perched on top of their heads, leading to further congestion of the roadways and no clear end in sight. Leaders within India claim that a lack of transportation infrastructure is to blame for the problems on the roadways but clearly the lack of capital, both physical and intellectual, limits the possibilities for swift change.

Despite the seemingly counterproductive nature of the contrasts observed in India today, the Indian economy is clearly headed in the right direction. Companies like Infosys and Wipro demonstrate that the use of technology to “catch-up” to more developed economies is indeed a viable option. Instead of toiling through the messy and often painful transition from an agrarian to an industrial economy like many of today’s G6 countries did during the early 20th century, India has capitalized on its strengths while taking advantage of the global demand for information technology. Cleary this is a time of transition in India between old economy and new; because this shift is happening without many of the intermediate steps that other economies have experienced, the contrasts stand out even more.

Gender equality in India, despite contrasting appearances, is years ahead of most developing countries. Indian women are truly leaders in the business and political worlds and bring diverse perspectives and ideas that clearly benefit any endeavor. India has certainly capitalized on this diversity and is in a position to set an example for both developing and developed countries alike.

Lastly, despite the opportunities presented by technology utilization and gender equality in India, the lack of capital seen in India is a major hurdle to overcome. The stark contrast between the old and new in terms of capital shows just how limiting this issue can be to national progress. With capital the immense human and intellectual potential in India could be unlocked, releasing a huge flood in productivity and economic growth. Indeed, many global investors have realized this and continue to pump investment into the country. It appears that the simple limiting factor in India today is capital, without which the contrasts between old and new will continue to conflict and slow the country’s growth.

In times of transition, contrasts can always be seen between old and new. The contrasts within the Indian economy and society are visible hallmarks of the sweeping changes affecting not just India but the rest of the world. As our group struggled to keep our pressed shirts clean while eating with our hands, we all got a much better feel of the unique changes taking place in India today.

Infosys campus in Bangalore

Banana leaf meal

Leah recently showed me a report on the top 100 sporting goods retailers in the US and I wanted to write about some of my thoughts about the data. All the facts and figures I’ll be referencing in my post come from this report, put out by Sporting Goods Business, just so ya know.

First of all, it is no big surprise that Wal-Mart is at the top of the list of sporting goods retailers but it really is surprising how big Wal-Mart is in this space. With $17.1B in sales (sporting goods + toys) they blow away #2 Target ($2.6B in athletic goods only) and all the “Big Box” sports retailers like The Sports Authority and Dick’s. While many sporting goods retailers would like to believe they “own” their particular sport, no one can outsell the big chains. Take for example Performance, Inc, owners of the Performance, Nashbar, and Supergo retail operations. Performance comes in on the list at #47 and clearly they are the 800 lb. gorilla in the retail bike industry. But I would wager that with $200M in estimated sales in 2004 that Performance is way behind Wal-Mart who could easily sell over $1B in bikes and accessories without breaking a sweat. Wal-Mart = the 8,000 lb. baseball bat wielding gorilla in the sporting goods industry.

I also found it interesting that Bass Pro Shops weighs in at #5 overall in the retail sporting goods sector with just under $2B in sales. The most amazing thing about this is that Bass Pro does this with just 26 stores! Just think about all the Foot Lockers (1,448 stores, $1.7B revenue) and Dick’s (235 stores but just $0.15B more in sales) out there that manage to sell just a fraction of what a single Bass Pro Shop sells. I remember reading that the original Bass Pro is the #1 tourist attraction in the state of Missouri with millions of customers each year. Wow. Cabela’s is also doing well with just 10 stores and $1.55B in revenues (even beating Bass Pro on a revenue per store basis).

Coming in at #15, Nike was estimated to have $1B in retail sales in 2004. This is not surprising since Nike is easily the biggest name is sports; but wait! Isn’t this a list of sporting goods retailers? Yep, it is and yep, they are. Nike has over 100 Niketown and Nike “outlet” shops around the country where customers can buy the latest gear at suggested retail prices. But what if you’re a retailer who sells Nike shoes? Isn’t this a little unfair for your vendor to sell directly to the public? Of course plenty of other suppliers have chosen this path (most notably Apple Computer) but the magnitude of this arrangement becomes evident when you look at the size of the stores below Nike on this list: REI, Champs Sports (probably huge buyers of Nike products), The Athlete’s Foot ($400M in sales), and Footaction (also $400M in sales). Seems like a tough business when your #1 product (shoes) is being offered directly by your #1 supplier (Nike). Plus Nike will never run out of the hot products while you beg for the scraps. Reebok and Adidas are also in on the action, coming in at #45 and #53 respectively.

There were lots of mergers and acquisitions in 2004 as Foot Locker snatched up Footaction (#31), EastBay (#37), and part of Athlete’s Foot (#31). Now maybe they can stay ahead of their biggest competitor/supplier (Nike). Dick’s bought Galyan’s (which I always liked better than REI, hopefully Dick won’t screw it up) and the VF Corporation bought Vans. VF, if you don’t know, has been snatching up distressed brands and now owns North Face, Jansport, Eastpack, and Reef to name a few.

One glaring omission in this year’s report is Sports Endeavors, Inc., #69 in the 2003 report. I’m actually doing an internship at Sports Endeavors (producers of the Eurosport soccer catalog, the Great Atlantic Lacrosse catalog, Soccer.com, and Lacrosse.com) this summer and I’m pretty sure that their 2004 revenue would place them squarely in the top 70 again this year. The only reason I can figure they weren’t included is that they don’t have any brick-and-mortar stores (which makes their business all the more impressive in my opinion). Since the report doesn’t mention having physical stores as a criteria for inclusion, it leaves me questioning how accurate this report really is since they are missing such a large player (and who knows how many others were similarly overlooked?).

All in all this is a great (if not somewhat incomplete) report for understanding the retail sporting goods industry and for identifying opportunities for the future.