DOCSLIB.ORG

Alibaba Vs. Amazon: a Business Model Comparison

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Alibaba Vs. Amazon: a Business Model Comparison UNIVERSITE CATHOLIQUE DE LOUVAIN LOUVAIN SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT Alibaba vs. Amazon: A business model comparison Supervisor: Professor Paul Belleflamme Research Master Thesis submitted by Feifei Xu With a view of getting the degree Master in Management (in Business Engineering) ACADEMIC YEAR 2015-2016 Acknowledgement First and foremost, I would like to thank my academic advisor Professor Paul Belleflamme for his valuable help and guidance throughout the realization of this thesis. I am very grateful for his insightful comments and precise review of my work. I would also like to thank all the great people who have provided me with support and motivation during the writing process: my parents and family in China, my boyfriend, my friends and classmates, and all the wonderful individuals I have met during my internship in Beijing and my exchanges at the University of Cologne and the London School of Economics. i. Table of content Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 Part 1. Literature review ........................................................................................................ 5 1.1 The business model ..................................................................................................................... 5 1.1.1 Review of the conceptualization, definitions and classifications ...................................... 5 1.1.2 Commonalities across studies ........................................................................................................ 14 1.1.3 Differences between business model and strategy .............................................................. 15 1.1.4 Other common misconceptions .................................................................................................... 16 1.1.5 The business model as value driver and source of competitive advantage ............... 17 1.2 Comparison of business models .......................................................................................... 18 1.3 Concluding remarks and observations .............................................................................. 19 Part 2. Methodology .............................................................................................................. 21 2.1 Theoretical foundations ......................................................................................................... 21 2.1.1 Transaction costs economics ......................................................................................................... 21 2.1.2 The impact of ICT ................................................................................................................................. 23 2.2 Analytical framework .............................................................................................................. 25 2.2.1 Matching .................................................................................................................................................. 27 2.2.2 Assembling ............................................................................................................................................. 28 2.2.3 Knowledge management .................................................................................................................. 29 2.3 Choice of comparison target and data collection ........................................................... 29 Part 3. Company Overview ................................................................................................. 31 3.1 Alibaba .......................................................................................................................................... 31 3.2 Amazon ......................................................................................................................................... 32 3.3 Economics .................................................................................................................................... 33 Part 4. Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 37 ii. 4.1 Matching ....................................................................................................................................... 37 4.1.1 Search costs ............................................................................................................................................ 37 4.1.2 Negotiating costs ................................................................................................................................. 40 4.1.3 Enforcement costs ............................................................................................................................... 43 4.1.4 Summary and trade-off analysis ................................................................................................... 50 4.2 Assembling .................................................................................................................................. 51 4.2.1 Retail business ...................................................................................................................................... 51 4.2.2 Membership programs ...................................................................................................................... 54 4.2.3 Logistics and delivery ........................................................................................................................ 55 4.2.4 Payment ................................................................................................................................................... 56 4.2.5 Advertising ............................................................................................................................................. 57 4.2.6 Proprietary technology ..................................................................................................................... 58 4.2.7 Hardware ................................................................................................................................................ 59 4.2.8 Online-to-offline services ................................................................................................................. 60 4.2.9 Publishing ............................................................................................................................................... 61 4.2.10 FinTech .................................................................................................................................................. 62 4.2.11 Content production and streaming service ........................................................................... 63 4.2.12 Summary and trade-off analysis ................................................................................................ 63 4.3 Knowledge management ........................................................................................................ 65 4.3.1 Transaction ............................................................................................................................................ 65 4.3.2 Assembling ............................................................................................................................................. 66 4.3.3 Cognition ................................................................................................................................................. 68 4.3.4 Summary and trade-off analysis ................................................................................................... 69 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 71 References ................................................................................................................................ 75 Appendices ............................................................................................................................... 91 iii. List of abbreviations and acronyms AMS: Amazon Marketing Service AWS: Amazon Web Service BBS: Bulletin Board System B2B: Business-to-Business B2C: Business-to-Consumer C2C: Consumer-to-Consumer FAQ: Frequently Asked Questions FBA: Fulfilment By Amazon FinTech: Financial Technology FY: Financial Year ICT: Information and Communication Technology IPO: Initial Public Offering M&A: Merger and Acquisition O2O: Online-to-Offline P2P: Peer-to-Peer RTB: Real-Time Bidding SME: Small and Medium Enterprise SRE: Seller-Reputation-Escalation TBO: Tmall Box Office iv. 1. Introduction Although still lacking a clear conceptualization, the term “business model” has been an essential element in the vocabulary of consultants, managers and academics for a while. One of the main reasons for this is that a well-engineered business model has been defined as a key factor behind the success of a company that may, often, even beat a better idea or technology (Afuah, 2004; Chesbrough, 2007). The understanding of the concept is not universal among practitioners (see works by George and Bock, 2011; Osterwalder, Pigneur and Tucci, 2005; Nielsen and Bukh, 2011) but these are well aware of the power and necessity of a sound business model. A survey from the Economist Intelligence Unit (2005) revealed that 54% out of more than 4,000 senior executives believed that a company’s competitive advantage would depend on
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 41-1-64-Vlazakis-Pdfa.Pdf (378.1Kb)
    Amazon’s Antitrust Fair Play, a Transatlantic Evaluation ANGELOS VLAZAKIS AND ANGELIKI VARELA For the first time after a century, antitrust law has been making head- lines around the country. Amazon, among other technological giants, finds itself in the middle of a cyclone against economic power. This article joins the endeavor of several scholars to understand Amazon’s conduct, but through a different lens. It tries to see the big picture of Amazon’s relevant market of operation, it evaluates indirect and potential competition and reaches the conclusion that the legendary e-retailer has a weak monopoly, if not any monopoly power. Subsequently, the article assesses several doctrines that could sanction Amazon’s market conduct through comparative legal re- search between American and European law to reach the conclusion that a broad interpretation of the current theory would have an adverse impact on social welfare. What if Amazon is a fair market player after all? . Angelos Vlazakis is an Attorney-at-Law; Onassis Foundation Scholar for Anti- trust Law; LL.M., University of Chicago; LL.M. in European Law (hons.) and LL.B. (hons.), National & Kapodistrian University of Athens. Angeliki Varela is an Attorney-at-Law; M.B.A. (hons.), University of Chicago Booth School of Business; LL.M., University of Penn- sylvania; LL.B., National & Kapodistrian University of Athens. The current article is a prod- uct of independent research conducted at the University of Chicago. It represents the opinions of the authors only, and not the position or opinions of the authors’ current employers. We are grateful to Professor Andrew Rosenfield for his meaningful feedback, mentorship and guid- ance throughout the drafting process.
    [Show full text]
  • HD [email protected] Or by Writing to the Directors at the Following Address
    THE HOME DEPOT PROXY STATEMENT AND NOTICE OF 2020 ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 9:00 a.m., Eastern Time COBB GALLERIA CENTRE, ATLANTA, GA Table of Contents INVESTOR FACTSHEET Strategy Our One Home Depot strategy aims to deliver shareholder value and grow our market share by providing best- in-class customer service through a seamless, interconnected shopping experience for our customers. We are continuously improving our online and in-store experience and providing enhanced training for our associates. In addition, to ensure we are the product authority in home improvement, we strive to provide unique and comprehensive product offerings, continued innovation, and exceptional convenience and value. To execute our strategy, we have committed approximately $11 billion over a multi-year period to investments in our stores, associates, interconnected and digital experience, pro customer experience, services business, supply chain, and product and innovation. Shareholder Return Principles Our first priority for our use of cash is investing in our business, as reflected by our One Home Depot strategy. Our use of the remainder of our cash is guided by our shareholder return principles: • Dividend Principle: Look to increase the dividend every year as we grow earnings • Return on Invested Capital Principle: Maintain a high return on invested capital, benchmarking all uses of excess liquidity against value created for shareholders through share repurchases • Share Repurchase Principle: After meeting the needs of the business, look to return excess cash to shareholders in the form of share repurchases Key Financial Performance Metrics Set forth below are key financial performance metrics for the indicated fiscal years.
    [Show full text]
  • China Digital Consumer Trends in 2019
    China digital consumer trends 2019 Discovering the next wave of growth Authors: Lambert Bu, Shenzhen Jacob Wang, Shanghai Kevin Wei Wang, Hong Kong Daniel Zipser, Shenzhen September 2019 Copyright © McKinsey & Company 2019 China digital consumer trends 2019 Discovering the next wave of growth China’s rise as a global leader in ecommerce has China’s 855 million digital consumers - among been nothing less than stunning. This year, online some of the most avid users of mobile phones and retail sales are expected to swell to $1.5 trillion, social media in the world - represent one of the representing a quarter of China’s total retail biggest prizes for global marketers. sales volume, and more than the retail sales of the ten next largest markets in the world – combined. (Exhibit 1) Exhibit 1 Online retail transaction value Online retail transaction value (2019 forecast1) 2019 forecast1 2017-19 CAGR % % of total retail value in USD Russia $135 Bn $30 Bn Canada $55 Bn 14% 22% 24% 5% 26% 11% United Korea $90 Bn Kingdom 22% 22% China’s online China USA retail market is $600 Bn Germany ~$1.5 Tn France Japan 15% 11% larger than the $80 Bn $65 Bn 24% 25% next 10 markets 9% 9% $115 Bn 15% 10% combined India 5% 9% Brazil $40 Bn $30 Bn 36% 3% Indonesia $15 Bn 13% 4% 36% 4% Argentina $7 Bn 21% 3% 1. Online B2C and C2C market; Forecast for year-end 2019 SOURCE: iResearch and MOFCOM for China; eMarketer; McKinsey China Digital Consumer Trends 2019 But things are getting a lot tougher: Growth of And an increasingly crowded marketplace has led online retail sales is cooling, dipping from the to fierce competition between brands, pushing up heady 40 and 50 percent annual rates seen in the the cost of acquiring new customers and retaining early part of the decade to 25 percent compound them.
    [Show full text]
  • Promotion Cooperation Framework Agreement
    Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited and The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited take no responsibility for the contents of this announcement, make no representation as to its accuracy or completeness and expressly disclaim any liability whatsoever for any loss howsoever arising from or in reliance upon the whole or any part of the contents of this announcement. (Incorporated in Bermuda with limited liability) (Stock Code: 1060) CONTINUING CONNECTED TRANSACTIONS - PROMOTION COOPERATION FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT PROMOTION COOPERATION FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT The Board announces that Shanghai TPP, a consolidated subsidiary of the Company, entered into the Promotion Cooperation Framework Agreement with Shanghai Rajax, a consolidated entity of AGH, on January 25, 2019 for a term commencing from January 25, 2019 to March 31, 2020. Pursuant to the Promotion Cooperation Framework Agreement, Shanghai TPP and Shanghai Rajax agree to provide advertising resources and/or services to each other for promoting brand names of the other party and/or their respective clients on their respective apps/platforms on the basis that the total market prices of such advertising resources and/or services provided to each other are equal, subject to the annual caps of the market price of the advertising resources and/or services concerned, and thus neither party has to pay the other party a cash consideration. LISTING RULES IMPLICATIONS Shanghai Rajax is a consolidated entity of AGH. AGH is the ultimate sole shareholder of Ali CV, which is a substantial shareholder and a connected person of the Company holding approximately 49% of the issued share capital of the Company as at the date of this announcement.
    [Show full text]
  • Esports – Who Are the Big Players and the Likely
    Esports – Who are the big players and the likely winners Millennial driven esports continues to grow rapidly. The number of esports enthusiasts worldwide was estimated to be ~165 million in 2018, and for total global viewers, the forecast is ~453 million in 2019. Esports global revenue is forecast to pass US$1b in 2019 and by 2022 the global eSports market revenue is forecast to reach US$1.79 billion growing at a CAGR of 22.3%. The big players in esports Activision Blizzard Inc. (NASDAQ: ATVI) Activision Blizzard owns the popular Overwatch League as well as World of Warcraft, StarCraft, Diablo, and Hearthstone. In 2018 Activision Blizzard signed a multiyear deal with Walt Disney to broadcast the Overwatch League. As of March 2018, it was the largest game company in the Americas and Europe in terms of revenue and market capitalization. Activision Blizzard has several business units: Activision Publishing, Blizzard Entertainment, King, Major League Gaming,and Activision Blizzard Studios. Alphabet Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOGL) Alphabet (Google) has a new cloud gaming platform called Stadia. It operates games hosted on remote servers and then streams video content to connected devices, including smartphones, tablets, computers and TVs. Other competitors in the streaming space include Amazon (Twitch), Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft, Tencent, and Alibaba. Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN) Amazon’s Twitch leads the online USA streaming market. Amazon acquired Twitch for nearly $1 billion in 2014. Twitch is only a very small percentage of Amazon’s massive revenue. Electronic Arts Inc. (NASDAQ: EA) Electronic Arts is an American video game company headquartered in California. It is the second-largest gaming company in the Americas and Europe by revenue and market capitalization.
    [Show full text]
  • JD: Envisioning the Future of Retail
    N9-618-051 REV: MAY 18, 2018 FENG ZHU SHIRLEY SUN JD: Envisioning the Future of Retail After celebrating JD’s 13th birthday on June 18, 2017, Richard Liu, the company’s founder, chairman and CEO, observed the construction site outside his office window. JD was the second largest e- commerce company in China by gross merchandise volume (GMV). (See Exhibit 1 on JD’s growth over the years.) The new office building expanded JD’s headquarters in Beijing, China, and symbolized the company’s recent success. June 18 not only marked JD’s founding, it also represented a shopping festival established by the company—and had quickly become one of China’s largest online shopping festivals in addition to the massive Singles’ Day sale on November 11, originally a festival for youths to celebrate their singlehood, as represented by the date’s four single digits “11.11.” From June 1-18, JD offered special promotions followed by other online retailers. In 2017, JD amassed a $17.6 billion in total transaction volume during that period, an increase of over 50% compared to the same period in the previous year.1 As JD challenged Alibaba more directly, Liu had to decide how to generate continued growth. To him, one important competitiveness of JD lay in the company’s self-operated nationwide logistics network and developments in proprietary technologies.2 With control over fulfillment and delivery, JD was able to offer same-or-next-day delivery as a standard service for Chinese consumers, a strategy that had won customers’ hearts over the years.3 This fulfillment capability put JD in the leadership position, even when compared to its US counterparts such as Amazon.
    [Show full text]
  • IKEA Readies Augmented Reality App for Shoppers, Using Apple Tech
    This copy is for your personal, non­commercial use only. To order presentation­ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers visit http://www.djreprints.com. https://blogs.wsj.com/cio/2017/06/21/ikea­readies­augmented­reality­app­for­shoppers­using­apple­tech/ CIO JOURNAL. IKEA READIES AUGMENTED REALITY APP For SHOPPERS, USING APPLE TECH IKEA bets an augmented reality app for Apple devices will improve the furniture shopping experience By SARA CASTELLANOS Jun 21, 2017 4:11 pm ET With IKEA's new augmented reality mobile app for Apple Inc. devices, users will have a full view of their room through the cameras on their devices and can visualize how a piece of furniture will look in their real environment. PHOTO: IKEA IKEA plans to unveil an augmented reality application for Apple Inc. iPhones and iPads this fall that will let customers visualize how a piece of furniture such as a couch or coffee table would look in their living rooms before they make a purchase. “We’ll give them confidence before buying,” said Michael Valdsgaard, head of digital transformation for Inter IKEA Systems B.V., the parent company of IKEA. Augmented reality, which superimposes digital content onto a user’s view of the real world through mobile devices or headsets, has already found myriad use cases in factory floors at enterprises. Now, retailers such as IKEA and online home furnishings company Wayfair Inc. are seeing value in augmented reality technology that could make shopping for furniture more enjoyable and also offer competitive advantages. I Michael Valdsgaard, head of digital transformation for Inter IKEA Systems B.V., the parent company of IKEA.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Media Contracts in the US and China
    DESTINED TO COLLIDE? SOCIAL MEDIA CONTRACTS IN THE U.S. AND CHINA* MICHAEL L. RUSTAD** WENZHUO LIU*** THOMAS H. KOENIG**** * We greatly appreciate the editorial and research aid of Suffolk University Law School research assistants: Melissa Y. Chen, Jeremy Kennelly, Christina Kim, Nicole A. Maruzzi, and Elmira Cancan Zenger. We would also like to thank the editors at the University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law. ** Michael Rustad is the Thomas F. Lambert Jr. Professor of Law, which was the first endowed chair at Suffolk University Law School. He is the Co-Director of Suffolk’s Intellectual Property Law Concentration and was the 2011 chair of the American Association of Law Schools Torts & Compensation Systems Section. Pro- fessor Rustad has more than 1100 citations on Westlaw. His most recent books are SOFTWARE LICENSING: PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICAL STRATEGIES (Lexis/Nexis, 3rd ed. forthcoming 2016), GLOBAL INTERNET LAW IN A NUTSHELL (3rd ed., West Academic Publishers, 2015), and GLOBAL INTERNET LAW (HORNBOOK SERIES) (West Academic Publishers, 2d ed. 2015). Professor Rustad is editor of COMPUTER CONTRACTS (2015 release), a five volume treatise published by Matthew Bender. *** Wenzhuo Liu, LL.B., LL.M, J.D., obtained China’s Legal Professional Qual- ification Certificate in 2011. In 2014, she became a member of the New York state bar. She earned an LL.M degree from the University of Wisconsin Law School in Madison, Wisconsin in 2012 and a J.D. degree from Suffolk University Law School in Boston. She was associated with Hunan Haichuan Law Firm in Changsha, China. Ms. Liu wrote a practice pointer on Software Licensing and Doing Business in China in the second and third editions of MICHAEL L.
    [Show full text]
  • Health & Sustainability Plan for IKEA Food
    © Inter IKEA Systems B.V. 2019 B.V. © Inter IKEASystems Health & Sustainability Plan for IKEA Food Goals and ambitions for the IKEA Food business with commitments to become people and planet positive by 2030 PUBLISHED: APRIL 2019 p.2 - IKEA FOOD HEALTH & SUSTAINABILITY PLAN - © INTER IKEA SYSTEMS B.V. 2019 SMAKLIG MÅLTID!* Health & *BON APPETITE! Sustainability at IKEA Food For many people, IKEA is all In our Restaurants, Bistros and about home furnishing. So it Swedish Food Markets, we want to be a destination for delicious food that might be surprising to some is trusted, affordable, healthy and that we’re also one of the sustainable – we will do this through top global food businesses Democratic Design, the same principles reaching hundred of millions we use to develop our home furnishing people every year. Today, offer. over 18,000 IKEA co-workers We open up to 25 new IKEA stores every work in our food business, and year. As a growing global business, close to 1 billion customers our brand and scale gives us a great visit our IKEA stores around opportunity – and responsibility – to the world. positively impact, influence and inspire thousands of co-workers and millions of customers all over the world. This is our plan for the IKEA Food business to become people & planet positive. p.3 - IKEA FOOD HEALTH & SUSTAINABILITY PLAN - © INTER IKEA SYSTEMS B.V. 2019 How can IKEA Food contribute? In the IKEA People & Planet Positive strategy three corresponding focus areas are Healthy & Circular Fair defined to help us to fulfil the IKEA vision and become sustainable & climate & people and planet positive.
    [Show full text]
  • BUSINESS WIRE)—January 28, 2016—Amazon.Com, Inc
    AMAZON.COM ANNOUNCES FOURTH QUARTER SALES UP 22% TO $35.7 BILLION SEATTLE—(BUSINESS WIRE)—January 28, 2016—Amazon.com, Inc. (NASDAQ: AMZN) today announced financial results for its fourth quarter ended December 31, 2015. Operating cash flow increased 74% to $11.9 billion for the trailing twelve months, compared with $6.8 billion for the trailing twelve months ended December 31, 2014. Free cash flow increased to $7.3 billion for the trailing twelve months, compared with $1.9 billion for the trailing twelve months ended December 31, 2014. Free cash flow less lease principal repayments increased to $4.7 billion for the trailing twelve months, compared with $529 million for the trailing twelve months ended December 31, 2014. Free cash flow less finance lease principal repayments and assets acquired under capital leases increased to $2.5 billion for the trailing twelve months, compared with an outflow of $2.2 billion for the trailing twelve months ended December 31, 2014. Common shares outstanding plus shares underlying stock-based awards totaled 490 million on December 31, 2015, compared with 483 million one year ago. Fourth Quarter 2015 Net sales increased 22% to $35.7 billion in the fourth quarter, compared with $29.3 billion in fourth quarter 2014. Excluding the $1.2 billion unfavorable impact from year-over-year changes in foreign exchange rates throughout the quarter, net sales increased 26% compared with fourth quarter 2014. Operating income increased 88% to $1.1 billion in the fourth quarter, compared with operating income of $591 million in fourth quarter 2014. Net income was $482 million in the fourth quarter, or $1.00 per diluted share, compared with net income of $214 million, or $0.45 per diluted share, in fourth quarter 2014.
    [Show full text]
  • Mount Yale Market Outlook Fourth Quarter 2019 Contents
    Mount Yale Market Outlook Fourth Quarter 2019 Contents Pg. 1. Summary 3 2. Growth, Inflation & Policy 8 3. Equities 18 4. Fixed Income & Credit 26 5. Real Assets 34 6. Opportunistic 38 7. Asset Allocation 42 Cartoon: The Gloves Are Off 4Q, 2019 4th Quarter 2019 Market Outlook, Page 3 Q3, 2019 Market Review QTD & YTD TOTAL RETURNS 26.8 20.6 19.2 15.7 16.1 14.2 13.3 12.6 12.5 13.0 11.4 11.1 8.5 7.7 6.2 6.8 5.4 4.7 4.5 3.4 3.1 2.3 1.9 1.7 1.5 1.3 1.8 0.3 1.0 0.8 0.6 -0.4 -1.0 -0.7 -2.4 -1.8 -4.1 -5.0 QTD YTD 4th Quarter 2019 Market Outlook, Page 4 Source: Bloomberg. SEE IMPORTANT DISCLOSURES AT THE END OF THIS PRESENTATION. Market Returns from Key Events Date TOTAL RETURNS, AS OF 10/18/19 3/10/00 10/9/02 10/9/07 (Tech (Tech (Housing 11/8/16 3/22/18 7/31/19 Bubble Bubble Bubble 3/9/09 (Trump 1/26/18 (start of 9/20/18 12/24/18 7/26/19 (Trade War Asset Class Benchmark peak) low) high) (GFC low) election) (Jan high) Trade War) (Sep high) (Dec low) (SPX ATH) escalation) ■ US REITs MSCI US REIT GR 11.6 11.5 6.2 20.0 10.5 14.9 21.0 18.3 33.4 8.0 7.5 ■ Municipal High Yield Bonds Bloomberg US Muni HY 6.1 6.3 5.3 8.8 6.5 8.7 9.4 10.4 9.7 2.2 2.1 ■ Global Real Estate Sec's S&P Global Property 9.9 10.2 3.5 16.5 9.9 6.0 10.8 14.1 24.6 5.1 5.6 ■ Gold LBMA Gold Price PM Fix 8.7 9.5 6.0 4.6 5.2 5.7 7.9 23.3 18.4 4.9 4.4 ■ US Interm-Term Bonds Bloomberg U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Alibaba Group Completes Full Acquisition and Integration of Ucweb
    Alibaba Group Completes Full Acquisition and Integration of UCWeb Beijing, China, June 11, 2014 – UCWeb Inc., the No. 1 mobile browser company in China, and Alibaba Group (“Alibaba”) announced today that Alibaba has fully acquired UCWeb and will form the UC mobile business group under the leadership of Yu Yongfu, chairman and chief executive of UCWeb. Prior to this, Alibaba held approximately 66% of the economic interests of UCWeb in the form of convertible preferred shares. The consideration for the acquisition of the remaining equity interest in UCWeb that Alibaba does not already own will be in the form of Alibaba shares and cash. The move highlights the comprehensive integration of Alibaba and UCWeb following Alibaba’s investment in UCWeb in 2009 and 2013, and will enables deeper synergies between the companies by marrying Alibaba’s strengths in e-commerce, cloud computing and big data technology and UCWeb’s leading market position and technology in mobile. The UC mobile business group of Alibaba will oversee the browser, mobile search, location-based services, mobile gaming, app store and mobile reader operations. “We are excited to welcome nearly 3000 new colleagues to the Alibaba family who share the same mission and passion as our team. Alibaba and UCWeb both hold firm to our beliefs and share a vision to improve people’s lives through the power of the Internet,” said Jack Ma, executive chairman of Alibaba Group. “Alibaba has unconditionally supported UCWeb’s endeavors’ over the course of past five years and we are excited to become a part of the team,” said Yu Yongfu, chairman and chief executive of UCWeb.
    [Show full text]