That does sound like a good use case... you make a good point. B2B seems a lot more viable than B2C with this technology, which is interesting because the white paper focuses almost exclusively on B2C.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
That does sound like a good use case... you make a good point. B2B seems a lot more viable than B2C with this technology, which is interesting because the white paper focuses almost exclusively on B2C.
but with blockchain, the difference in cost and efficiency of B2B vs B2C disappears. everything is integrated. I'm not an expert but there are probably separated systems now based on country, companies, delivery and the end consumer. If you put everything in one system, all becomes end consumer driven.
Are you sure it disappears? There are many more transactions with B2C than B2B. Imagine selling zillions of t-shirts at wal-mart vs. selling a few thousand "parcels" of goods to a business. Also, RFID chips cost money - I'm not sure if the profit margins for a lot of goods are wide enough to incorporate the added cost of individual RFID chips and blockchain fees
I would say it disappears or gets extremely integrated and cheap. RFID chips are getting so affordable that they would probably sold at a fraction of a cent. I've read it a long time ago, but here is a chart I just googled: