Category: lenS & thoughtS
Online Higher Education (4) – Online Degrees
Online Degrees Before MOOCs
While the previous posts (2) (3) summarized the birth and development (especially the model of fee-for-certificates) of MOOCs, online degrees, as a more “formal” segment of online higher educations, was actually born before 2011.
The boom can be attributed to the 1. advancement in technology infrastructure (higher internet speed, 4G, streaming, etc.) 2. people’s behavior changes such as the growing adoption of smart personal devices (smartphones, etc.) 3. increasingly burdensome higher education costs in the US and associated student debts 4. the incentives provided by the regulatory environment such as the re-authorized Higher Education (Opportunity) Act in 2008.
Distance education: US Department of Education shall not require an accreditor to have separate standards, procedures or policies for evaluation of distance education. Accreditors must, however, require institutions that offer distance education to establish that a student registered for a distance education course is the same student who completes and receives credit for it.
Then, there emerged a group of companies called Online Program Management (OPM) providers, with 2U being the current leader.
2U
The first of its kind was launched in 2008 – MAT@USC, Master of Arts in Teaching Program, developed by the USC Rossier School of Education in partnership with 2tor Inc. (the company later its changed name into 2U Inc. in 2012)
The basic idea is to replicate the degree offerings in the online format as much as possible. Private companies like 2tor will invest upfront and share the majority of future tuitions. The programs costs were a little cheaper (but at the similar level) than the traditional on-campus version.
The agreement of MAT@USC program provides a glimpse into the structure. As mentioned in the announcement, “tuition for MAT@USC is the same as the USC on-campus program at approximately $1,300 per credit.”
In 2012, when MOOCs were getting more attentions, 2tor also raised more capital and expanded the partnerships. It raised $26 million Series D in April and had 5 programs in agreement: USC’s Rossier School of Education for the MAT@USC mentioned before, USC’s Masters of Social Work Program (MSW@USC) added in 2010, Georgetown’s nursing program (Nursing@Georgetown) launched in Spring 2011, UNC’s MBA program (MBA@UNC) starting in July 2011, and announced the addition of UNC’s Master of Public Administration (MPA@UNC) right before this financing round. (See appendix for the current tuition of these five programs)
As we shall see in the next post that, as OPMs grew, at the same time, MOOCs were expanding into OPM’s fields, partnering with universities to offer degrees related programs.
At the same time, they are also trying to provide non-university based higher education, usually for/with companies in industries.
Born with different origins and offerings, MOOCs and OPMs are now coming to fight similar battles and creating full-service online higher education platforms:
-
- fee-for-certificates
- degrees-based programs
- career-oriented continuing education
To be continued
Other more recent highly watched events for 2U included:
May 2017 2U to acquire GetSmarter for approximately $103 million, which provides online short courses in partnership with universities – just like what MOOCs did.
August 2017 HBS, SEAS and FAS partner with 2U, Inc., to offer the Harvard Business Analytics Program. The first cohort of students is expected start classes in March 2018. The total cost of the program—not including travel and lodging expenses—to be $51,500 based on current program fee rates.
January 2018 2U and WeWork announced a broad partnership: e.g. WeWork spaces are available to 2U students enrolled in graduate degree programs; WeWork members and employees can access $5 million in scholarships to enroll in 2U programs, etc.
April 2019 2U to Trilogy for $750 million in cash and shares, a large boot camp provider that partners with continuing education divisions at dozens of universities.
Appendix
- MAT@USC current rate of tuition for the 2019–2020 academic year is $1,928 per credit.
- MSW@USC 2019-2020 Unit Charges: $1,928 is the per-unit rate for students enrolled in 1-14 units. $28,628 is the flat rate for students enrolled in 15-18 units.
- Nursing@Georgetown’s tuition is $2,139.00 per credit hour as of Academic Year 2019-2020.
- MBA@UNC in 2011 said “tuition will be $89,000 for the two-year program and will include books, texts, student fees and lodging and food costs for four weekend immersions.” For students beginning in the July 2019 term, the tuition for the 2019-2020 academic year (July – June) is $125,589.06.
- For MPA@UNC students enrolled in the program in academic year 2019–2020, tuition will be $1,209 per credit hour. Students who start the online MPA program in academic year 2019–2020 can expect to pay at least $54,405 for the entire program.
End of Decade Thoughts (1): An Increasingly Divided United States
This is a series about what we have seen in the past decade.
An Increasingly Divided United States
Three aspects:
1. The 2008 financial crisis provided a great opportunity for those who had equity while made many others in debt work years to recover. And the tax reform exacerbated the process.
– When we entered the past decade, prices were cheap for a lot of equities, but only for those who can buy.
– Differences were then created when the economy recovered – those who held equities enjoyed it.
– On the other hand, those who can’t buy didn’t share the growth (in any bull markets like stock, housing, etc.)
– Thus, more wealth inequalities were created. Supporting evidences could be found for a graph
Online Higher Education (3) – MOOCs
Udacity
As mentioned in the previous blog, Udacity started in 2012, with roots from free computer science classes offered by Stanford in 2011. Its co-founder and CEO Thrun, known as one of the inventors of self-driving cars, has previously founded Google X and Google’s self-driving car team.
In June 2012, Udacity pioneered the on-site finals for MOOCs for a $89 fee, partnering with Pearson.
In Jan 2013, Udacity announced a partnership with San Jose State University (SJSU) to pilot three new courses, available for college credit at SJSU for the Spring 2013 semester and offered entirely online. The courses, if taken for college credits, have a price of $150 per course.
However, six months after it launched, San Jose State was suspending the Udacity partnership as more than half the students in the first batch of online courses failed their final exams.
Udacity has focused more on the vocational courses and create materials from non-universities sources, especially in tech.
In June 2014, Udacity and AT&T announced the “Nanodegree” program, designed to teach programming skills needed to qualify for an entry-level IT position at AT&T. The coursework is said to take less than a year to complete, and cost about US$200/month.
In Nov 2015, Udacity raised a $105 million Series D valued at $1 billion, led by Bertelsmann, with Scotland’s Baillie Gifford, Emerson Collective and Google Ventures joining as new investors. Existing investors Andreessen Horowitz, Charles River Ventures, and Drive Capital also participated in the round. The announcement came as the company celebrated the one-year anniversary of its nanodegree program. Udacity reported 11,000 students are currently enrolled in nanodegree programs in 168 countries.
Coursera
In Apr 2012, Coursera raised $16 million in venture funding from KPCB and NEA. At the beginning, the company has partnered with Stanford, Princeton, University of California at Berkeley, University of Michigan, and University of Pennsylvania to bring professor-created classes online.
Aside from offering free courses to the masses, Coursera’s learning management service (LMS) platform can be used internally by universities to revamp their online course programs.
In Sep 2012, Coursera announced that it is working with the American Council on Education (ACE) to initiate a credit-equivalence evaluation of a subset of the MOOCs.
In Jan 2013, Coursera announced that students would be offered the opportunity to earn Verified Certificates – called Signature Track, priced from $30 to $100 on a course-by-course basis. Students will create a Signature Profile by first taking two photographs with their webcam: one of themselves and another of an acceptable photo ID document. Next, students will create a biometric profile of their unique typing patterns by typing a short phrase. When a student submits work in the course, they authenticate their identity by typing the same short phrase, which is then matched to their recorded samples. Upon successful completion of their course, students will receive a Verified Certificate issued by both the participating university and Coursera.
According to InsideHighEd, revenue from the fee-based path will be split with partner universities. A Coursera spokeswoman said universities would keep 6-15 percent of revenue from courses taught by their professors, as well as 20 percent of profits.
Some other statistics shared by Coursera in May 2013: almost 70% of the students who joined the Signature Track went on to successfully complete their course; 9,000+ students from all around the world have joined the Signature Track for their course; over 2,000 students are taking Gamification from University of Pennsylvania with Signature Track.
Coursera brought in $220,000 in the first quarter of 2013.
More recently, in Apr 2019, Coursera raised $103 million Series E, led by a strategic investor, the Australian online recruitment and course directory provider SEEK Group, with participation from Future Fund and NEA.
A summary so far for MOOCs and fee-for-certificates
As of 2019, we could see fee-for-certificates has become a mainstream business model to monetize on a subset of MOOCs users. Certificates are issued for single-courses or programs (grouped courses).
Certificates could be issued/recognized by the platform (e.g. Udacity, Coursera, edX) and/or by the organizations (companies or universities). Letting users put those certificates on social medias such as LinkedIn do provide an incentive to purchase.
At the same time, part of the materials/courses can still be accessed for free if users don’t need the certificates.
To be continued
Some Wisdom From LEAD Class
- Team Culture is better thought of as an outcome than as an input.
- Find proper balance of advocacy and inquiry
- Organizational design can be a source of innovation and competitive advantage
- Distinguish between performance gap and opportunity gap
Some common bias/problems
- Attribution Error
- Failure to discuss and integrate uniquely held information
- Intention vs impact from ourselves and others
- Growing without transition from informal to formal organization
SoftBank Has An Easy Strategy – Mobile Payment In Every Emerging Economy
SoftBank might be the investment firm outside of China that understands mobile payments the best.
Tapping Ant Financial and Tencent’s interests in overseas markets, SoftBank has investments in every major emerging economy.
Southeast Asia: Grab
SoftBank inject another $2 billion earlier this year into Grab. It first invested in GrabTaxi back in 2014 with $250 million Series D, making itself the largest shareholder. GrabTaxi then rebranded into Grab in 2016, entering into payment service with GrabPay and other businesses. It also acquired Kudo based in Indonesia in 2017 to beef up its payment platform.
[Also, in July, Softbank’s Vision Fund and GIC invested $300 million in e-wallet VNPAY’s parent company for Vietnam]
India: Paytm
This week, SoftBank and Ant Financial injected $1 billion into Paytm. The competition intensifies with Google Pay, payments from e-commerce and Facebook’s payment especially on WhatsApp.
Argentina: Ualá
On November 25, Ualá raised a $150 million Series C led by Tencent and SoftBank. Ualá is a mobile banking tech platform and allows users to transfer money, invest in mutual funds, request loans, pay bills and top-up prepaid services.
Mexico: Clip
SoftBank invested $20 million in Clip, leading a $100 million round in May. Clip offers Square-like products for merchant payments, as the country is more relying on cards.
Updates – Mexico: Konfio
On December 3, SoftBank invested $100 million into Konfio, which provides credit underwriting, or SMB loans.
Combining Konfio and Clip will create the Square or Clover in Mexico.
An easy model and bet on those economies.
How Card Networks May Fail: Top Merchants With Gift Cards + Mobile Wallet
In the US, as top merchants getting bigger, they are able to drive the adoption of cash-like mobile wallets, internalizing more transaction infrastructure, cutting payment networks’ growth & profitability.
We have already seen the success of Starbucks’s mobile order & pay, launched at the end of 2014. The combination of its mobile app, (gift) cards and cash-like value in the app reduces the overall transactions costs of Starbucks purchases. Other benefits like managing the loyalty program and mobile orders/pick-ups makes it the role model that big merchants (like Walmart) wants to follow.
Currently, some merchants are offering co-branded credit cards at the same time. But I think the long-term goal is to promote the usage of their own mobile app and cash (e.g. Starbucks credit card comes with an annual fee that I think is discouraging people from using the card in the long-term but can be used as a market tool for now). They can reduce (most of) the transaction costs and own the data (e.g. payment networks can only touch the reloading part of Uber Cash, but not the transactions made via Uber Cash – no fees, no data).
Luckin Coffee (3)
Previous post on growth in stores and per store/unit growth.
Now here are some number about the coffee market in the US.
- 64% of American adults consume coffee every day
- An average American drinks 3.1 cups of coffee per day
- Americans drink about 400 million cups of coffee every day
- Americans drink about 146 billion cups of coffee annually
- 65% of US adults drink coffee with their breakfast
- The average price of a cup of coffee in the US is $3.28
- Coffee shops see a 7% annual growth rate on average
- The annual coffee retail sales in the US are about $5.2 billion
In China, first we can find a subset of the 1.4 population by taking the ~60% between age 15-45 and ~60% in urban areas -> 500 million.
Then assuming 20% of the target 500 million customers will visit/purchase in stores like Luckin (-> 100 million) twice a week (100 cups per year) -> 10 billion cups per year.
The current average monthly transacting customers is 9 million.
Using average price of $2 per cup, the estimated market can reach $20 billion easily in 1-2 years.
And given that Luckin is expanding into other categories like cream cheese teas, fruit teas and juices, twice per week is not an overestimate.
An annualized revenue of $2 billion is only 10% of the addressable market.
Luckin Coffee (2)
Previous post on Luckin’s store counts growth.
As Luckin also reported the number of items sold, we could get the average net selling price, which is growing slowly. The discounts on items sold have already been considered in net revenue. (Free items are included in Sales & Marketing expenses).
Given that the menu prices are usually between RMB 21-27, the overall discount is still over 50%.
Another chart tho, is net product revenue per store. The number of store is averaged between the beginning and the end of the quarter. Since more stores are maturing, this figure is growing significantly.
In comparison, Starbucks International has a little bit less than $1 million per store, KFC China has a little bit over $250k per store.
- Starbucks International company-operated per stores revenue $~0.9 million
counts as of CY2019Q3: 5,860
revenue as of CY2019Q3: $5,256.2 million - KFC China company-operated per stores revenue $~0.27 million
counts as of CY2019Q3: 4,925+863 = 5,788
revenue as of CY2019Q3: $1,546 million
Luckin Coffee (1)
Luckin Coffe (Nasdaq: LK) released its Q3 quarterly earnings last week.
More than 700 new stores opened in Q3. This might be fastest growing coffee chain in history.
Luckin grew to 3,680 stores from 9 store at the end of 2017.
You can’t even see the number for 2017 Q4 in the chart below.