????團(tuán)購(gòu)網(wǎng)站LivingSocial將裁員400人的消息時(shí)至今日已不是令人驚訝的新聞了。所謂的在線(xiàn)團(tuán)購(gòu)行業(yè)從來(lái)就站不住腳——至少對(duì)不起那些夸張的宣傳吹捧，也對(duì)不起投資人給LivingSocial和Groupon等團(tuán)購(gòu)網(wǎng)站投入的大把資金。

????但是人們花了很長(zhǎng)時(shí)間才認(rèn)識(shí)到這一點(diǎn)。如果穿越互聯(lián)網(wǎng)時(shí)代的迷霧，回溯到2009年和2010年，你會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)，許多科技媒體對(duì)團(tuán)購(gòu)這個(gè)領(lǐng)域極為熱衷，而它們其中一些根本就不關(guān)心新聞報(bào)道背后的真相。2010年，在最受歡迎的團(tuán)購(gòu)網(wǎng)站Groupon還沒(méi)有成為替罪羊之前，Groupon還獲得了一個(gè)“最佳社交商務(wù)應(yīng)用”的頭銜?？萍疾┛蚑echCrunch以及其它一些博客每年都會(huì)給幾家科技公司頒發(fā)這類(lèi)獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)。Groupon的CEO安德魯?梅森還贏(yíng)得了“年度CEO”的美譽(yù)。

????從幸災(zāi)樂(lè)禍的角度看，頒發(fā)這些獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)的時(shí)機(jī)可謂再好不過(guò)了。幾乎就在同一時(shí)期，團(tuán)購(gòu)的大衰退開(kāi)始了，盡管當(dāng)時(shí)Groupon已經(jīng)宣布公司即將上市。2011年，Groupon的幾位高管突然離職，而梅森本人也因?yàn)檫`返了IPO的“緘默期”規(guī)定，以及在IPO前后批準(zhǔn)了一些惡心的會(huì)計(jì)流程而飽受批評(píng)。2011年11月，Groupon的IPO進(jìn)行得非常成功，公司估值達(dá)到127億美元。一年后，它的市值就縮水至29億美元，股價(jià)狂跌80%。據(jù)說(shuō)Groupon的董事會(huì)正考慮換掉梅森。

????與Groupon相比，LivingSocial的處境也好不到哪去。這次裁員幅度相當(dāng)于該公司4,500名員工的9%，而且被裁的主要是銷(xiāo)售和客服人員。上個(gè)月，LivingSocial的虧損達(dá)到5.66億美元，而收入只有1.24億美元（這已經(jīng)是去年同期的一倍）。其中有4.96億美元的虧損是由于并購(gòu)市值的縮水，而這主要是由于公司的核心業(yè)務(wù)——即團(tuán)購(gòu)業(yè)務(wù)十分慘不忍睹。與此同時(shí)，作為擁有LivingSocial公司30%股份的股東亞馬遜公司（Amazon），它對(duì)LivingSocial的投資也虧損了1.67億美元。（2010年亞馬遜向LivingSocial投資了1.75億美元。）

????彭博社（Bloomberg News）近日獲得了一份LivingSocial的CEO蒂姆?奧肖尼斯寫(xiě)給員工的備忘錄，看來(lái)奧肖尼斯上個(gè)月為了找正面報(bào)道花了不少工夫。他在備忘錄中寫(xiě)道，9月份的現(xiàn)金流呈正數(shù)，這還是公司有史以來(lái)頭一遭?！吧霞径茸詈笠粋€(gè)月的月末，我們?cè)阢y行里的現(xiàn)金超過(guò)了當(dāng)月月初的數(shù)字，這在我們通向盈利和長(zhǎng)期成功的路上是一個(gè)重要的里程碑?！?/p>

????兩三年前“團(tuán)購(gòu)熱”方興未艾的時(shí)候，撲天蓋地的宣傳全都忽略了一個(gè)鐵的事實(shí)，那就是所謂的在線(xiàn)團(tuán)購(gòu)并不是一個(gè)非常出色的業(yè)務(wù)。首先使用團(tuán)購(gòu)的人正在迅速減少，其次團(tuán)購(gòu)用戶(hù)在本地商家那里獲得了很大的折扣后，往往再也不會(huì)到同一家商鋪付全款消費(fèi)了，而這恰恰與商家參與團(tuán)購(gòu)的初衷背道而馳。更糟糕的是，團(tuán)購(gòu)行業(yè)的門(mén)坎很低，人人都能參與，因而沒(méi)過(guò)多久，團(tuán)購(gòu)業(yè)就呈現(xiàn)出“百團(tuán)大戰(zhàn)”的局面。它意味著沒(méi)有一家公司有真正的市場(chǎng)支配力，而網(wǎng)絡(luò)效應(yīng)（即人們看見(jiàn)其他人使用某個(gè)服務(wù)，就去跟風(fēng)使用某個(gè)服務(wù)）也會(huì)因此降到最低。

????The news that LivingSocial will lay off about 400 employees shouldn't come as much of a surprise at this point. The online-coupon business has never made much sense -- at least, not enough sense to justify the incredible hype and vast piles of investor cash companies like LivingSocial, Groupon (GRPN), and others once drew.

????But it took a long time for people to realize this. If you look back through the foggy mists of Internet time -- to 2009 and 2010 -- you'll find that that the tech media, particularly the outlets that tend to be the least discerning about what gets covered and how, couldn't resist thetemptation to enthuse over the sector. In 2010, Groupon -- the darling of the sector before it became the whipping boy -- won a Crunchie for "Best Social Commerce App." The Crunchies are awards given out each year by TechCrunch and other tech blogs to the companies they cover. Groupon CEO Andrew Mason also won as "CEO of the Year."

????From a cynic's perspective, the timing of the awards couldn't have been more perfect. Almost immediately, the backlash ensued, even as Groupon announced that it would go public. In 2011, several top executives bolted, and Mason came in for some heavy criticism when it was allegedhe violated the IPO "quiet period" rule and, later, that he had approved some skeevy accounting procedures both before and after the IPO. The November 2011 IPO went gangbusters, valuing the company at $12.7 billion. A year later, its market cap is about $2.9 billion. The stock has lost about 80% of its value. Groupon's board is reported to be considering replacing him.

????LivingSocial hasn't fared much better. The layoffs represent about 9% of the company's 4,500-strong workforce, and are mainly made up of sales and customer-service personnel. The company last month reported a $566 million loss on revenues of $124 million (which was double the year-earlier period's sales, if that matters). It took a $496 million charge on the loss of value of acquisitions, many of which were made because the company's core business -- online coupons -- is so terrible. Meanwhile, Amazon (AMZN), which owns 30% of LivingSocial, took a $167 million charge on losses on that investment, which it made in 2010 when it laid out $175 million.

????In a memo to employees obtained by Bloomberg News, CEO Tim O'Shaughnessy last month seemed to be digging hard for positive news when he wrote that cash flow in September was postive for the first time in the company's history. "We ended the last month of the quarter with more money in the bank than we had at the beginning of the month, marking an important milestone on our path to profitability and long-term success," he wrote.

????What was missing from all the hype a couple of years ago was the bedrock fact that online coupons don't make for very good business. People who use them (and whose numbers are fast-declining) get often-huge discounts from local businesses, but too often don't ever go back to those businesses to pay full price, which is supposed to be the whole idea for offering them. Even worse, there are few barriers to entry -- anybody could do it, and for awhile there, it seemed as if everyone did, as companies packed into the space. That means that no company can have any real market power, and network effects -- people using a service because other people are using the service -- are minimal.