...you can waste your time and save your money by checking this out of your local library.
If you want to get an "inside view" of the inner workings of Wall Street during the excessive gyrations of the '80s, then read Den of Theives - that book is well written and well worth the money!
What turned me off about this book was the structure and the writing style. The first half of the book was essentially the author relating fortuitous circumstances that were the product of Serendipity. He was simply in the right place at the right time, had virutally no idea how he got there, felt out of place the whole time (even when he was raking in the Big Bucks in NY and London), and so now he thought he'd wwrite a book about it. I also got the sense that he was trying to assuage some guilt from his association at Salomon Brothers. He was there, he made a lot of money, good for him - get over it!
I was also pretty disappointed because the subject matter has A LOT more potential. I might have actually enjoyed it - had I not read Den of Theives 7 years earlier, and already had some idea of how things took place. But, if you can get it for $5 or less (including shipping), and you have little to no knowledge of what an investment banker's life is like (and you haven't also seen the movie Wall Street (which covers the same highlights in this book)), then it's probably worth it.
I did like the wrap up he did towards the end of the book, relating where he had heard everyone from the firm ended up...although that seemed a little rushed...
Thursday, November 09, 2006
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Convergence is NOT bullshit
Let me just say, for the record, that Chris and I see eye-to-eye on a lot of things, but I've got to disagree with him on this one. We've even gone back and forth on this topic over several months. And even though I've wanted to I just haven't been able to blog about this one until now.
As with most general platitudes (which sound great to say, but upon further examination don't always hold water), one needs to first set the context of the remark. Seamus Blackley (one of the original creators of the Microsoft Xbox) was correct when he made his statement – in the context of what he was talking about.
The Xbox would NOT be a good all-in-one home media device (at least, not right out of the gate, when they had the conversation many years ago). I still don't think it's ready for prime time. Will Microsoft get there? Probably? Will the Xbox be the vehicle? Don't know. But, that converged functionality is coming; people want it and companies want to figure out how to deliver it. (In fact, I've got a few ideas of my own on how to do this...but that's a blog for another day...)
Here are some good examples of convergence (which I am summarizing to mean a successful combination of functionality and delivery vehicle):
- secure fax machine
- recent versions of smart phones & Blackberries (Treo 700P/W, the HTCs, etc.)
- SkyNet service (which got renamed to Flynet...hmmm) on Lufthansa (no, I'm not talking about this one; I'm talking about this one)
- roller skates and Heelies
- Reese's Peanut Butter Cups
- cable industry converging with the telephone industry into something new (i.e. - Comcast, SBC, Qwest, etc.)
- Youtube.com
- Amazon.com (internet, book store, supply chain and logistics expertise)
- (and yes, the swiss army knife)
...and there are more. The point is, by bringing together different functionality and vehicles with which to deliver it to defined markets, certain companies will gain advantages over their rivals, for some period of time. So, while I think this is also a good and cool example of convergence, ultimately market acceptance and business execution will determine how long that advantage remains.
The graphic that Chris posted depicting a toaster / coffee maker / bread baker is an example of “Convergence of Convenience”. The question is not, "Could you eat at The Palm with a Swiss Army knife and enjoy the experience (well, I could, but that's just me)?" Rather, the quesstion is, "Would you eat at The Palm with a Swiss Army knife and enjoy the experience"? Most people (the Contrarians among us aside) would say "No" to that experience.
Currently, I think most “smart cameras” and cell phones would fall into this category. Honestly, I see this type of innovation as "educational" more than anything else. "Let's show people what this technology can do, let's give it to them, and then let's step back. Many people knew they wanted a Walkman before Sony came out with one. And so you havethings like this and this.
No, most of these examples of convergence are not mind-blowingly earth shattering – but for a short period of time, they are market differentiating. And that is really the point. If a company can execute well with that tactic then they will have an advantage for some period of time. Other companies will try to copy them. Consumers / Markets will then vote with their dollars. They will also find unintended ways to leverage the new technology in ways the creators (probably) hadn't even considered when they created the original specifications. Of note:
- music sampling in rap and rock music
- tire swings
- coke bottle bird feeders
- camera phone to take picture of the license plates and damage to cars in a car crash
- other --> who knows?
And people in companies will have to innovate again. And the cycle will continue...and that's why Convergence is not Bullshit. Some additional food for thought...
As with most general platitudes (which sound great to say, but upon further examination don't always hold water), one needs to first set the context of the remark. Seamus Blackley (one of the original creators of the Microsoft Xbox) was correct when he made his statement – in the context of what he was talking about.
The Xbox would NOT be a good all-in-one home media device (at least, not right out of the gate, when they had the conversation many years ago). I still don't think it's ready for prime time. Will Microsoft get there? Probably? Will the Xbox be the vehicle? Don't know. But, that converged functionality is coming; people want it and companies want to figure out how to deliver it. (In fact, I've got a few ideas of my own on how to do this...but that's a blog for another day...)
Here are some good examples of convergence (which I am summarizing to mean a successful combination of functionality and delivery vehicle):
- secure fax machine
- recent versions of smart phones & Blackberries (Treo 700P/W, the HTCs, etc.)
- SkyNet service (which got renamed to Flynet...hmmm) on Lufthansa (no, I'm not talking about this one; I'm talking about this one)
- roller skates and Heelies
- Reese's Peanut Butter Cups
- cable industry converging with the telephone industry into something new (i.e. - Comcast, SBC, Qwest, etc.)
- Youtube.com
- Amazon.com (internet, book store, supply chain and logistics expertise)
- (and yes, the swiss army knife)
...and there are more. The point is, by bringing together different functionality and vehicles with which to deliver it to defined markets, certain companies will gain advantages over their rivals, for some period of time. So, while I think this is also a good and cool example of convergence, ultimately market acceptance and business execution will determine how long that advantage remains.
The graphic that Chris posted depicting a toaster / coffee maker / bread baker is an example of “Convergence of Convenience”. The question is not, "Could you eat at The Palm with a Swiss Army knife and enjoy the experience (well, I could, but that's just me)?" Rather, the quesstion is, "Would you eat at The Palm with a Swiss Army knife and enjoy the experience"? Most people (the Contrarians among us aside) would say "No" to that experience.
Currently, I think most “smart cameras” and cell phones would fall into this category. Honestly, I see this type of innovation as "educational" more than anything else. "Let's show people what this technology can do, let's give it to them, and then let's step back. Many people knew they wanted a Walkman before Sony came out with one. And so you havethings like this and this.
No, most of these examples of convergence are not mind-blowingly earth shattering – but for a short period of time, they are market differentiating. And that is really the point. If a company can execute well with that tactic then they will have an advantage for some period of time. Other companies will try to copy them. Consumers / Markets will then vote with their dollars. They will also find unintended ways to leverage the new technology in ways the creators (probably) hadn't even considered when they created the original specifications. Of note:
- music sampling in rap and rock music
- tire swings
- coke bottle bird feeders
- camera phone to take picture of the license plates and damage to cars in a car crash
- other --> who knows?
And people in companies will have to innovate again. And the cycle will continue...and that's why Convergence is not Bullshit. Some additional food for thought...
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
"Let the Sun shine..."
As a follow up to yesterday's post, check this out: http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/061107/sec_ceo_blogs.html?.v=2
(and for you younger folks, the blog title is a double entendre):
- refernences that famous anthem by the 5th. Dimension
- a nod to the company profiled in the press release
(and for you younger folks, the blog title is a double entendre):
- refernences that famous anthem by the 5th. Dimension
- a nod to the company profiled in the press release
Creative and Profitable
Why begrudge someone else's success just because they took of an advantage of a creative idea before you? I'm not sure why some people feel this need; to me, that's just "my bad" and it means I need to take some action!
What am I referring to? These interesting business ideas are just a few examples:
- Million Dollar Web Page (http://www.milliondollarhomepage.com/); the ones I like the most are the single-pixel ones - some of which are either reserved for someone, have an order pending, or are just plan silly (see if you can find the "Pimp My Pixel - the Wave of the Future" one!)
- One Red Paper Clip (http://oneredpaperclip.blogspot.com/) tells of one man's journey from one red paper clip to owning a house in Saskatchewan
- Pixledoodle (http://www.pixeloodle.com/) - another knock-off or will this one work too? The owner is almost half way to their goal...
and more...
While these might just seem like gimmicky internet ideas, the reality is that they:
- created attention around a particular theme
- the creator was able to create tangible value from an intangible idea
- someone else saw enough value in what was going on that they gave the creator money, time, etc.
Nothing wrong with that. Does that mean that this is the forefront of some new business model we all need to start worrying about? I don't think so; not at this stage, anyway.
I think that it's a good experiment that shows the possibilities of making technology accessible to people, and letting them see where their creativity takes them. And that's where businesses need to show more courage. I tried to get my old company interested in web blogs (6 years ago), just for internal uses. I used examples of car companies letting their employees blog about all sorts of things - gardening, the company, etc. - and showed how it actually helped the company overall. It was over ruled as a "potential security issue". Now, the CEO blogs and is talking with the SEC about disseminating financial information to the world via a blog.
Companies, industries, organizations...if they've been around for a bit they have a vested interested in the status quo. After all, that's a large part of what got them where they are in the first place. I understand why governments might think that way. I have a harder time supporting this notion for the marketplace. Sticking with what you know will usually just get you more of what you've already got.
Now, what are you going to do with it?
What am I referring to? These interesting business ideas are just a few examples:
- Million Dollar Web Page (http://www.milliondollarhomepage.com/); the ones I like the most are the single-pixel ones - some of which are either reserved for someone, have an order pending, or are just plan silly (see if you can find the "Pimp My Pixel - the Wave of the Future" one!)
- One Red Paper Clip (http://oneredpaperclip.blogspot.com/) tells of one man's journey from one red paper clip to owning a house in Saskatchewan
- Pixledoodle (http://www.pixeloodle.com/) - another knock-off or will this one work too? The owner is almost half way to their goal...
and more...
While these might just seem like gimmicky internet ideas, the reality is that they:
- created attention around a particular theme
- the creator was able to create tangible value from an intangible idea
- someone else saw enough value in what was going on that they gave the creator money, time, etc.
Nothing wrong with that. Does that mean that this is the forefront of some new business model we all need to start worrying about? I don't think so; not at this stage, anyway.
I think that it's a good experiment that shows the possibilities of making technology accessible to people, and letting them see where their creativity takes them. And that's where businesses need to show more courage. I tried to get my old company interested in web blogs (6 years ago), just for internal uses. I used examples of car companies letting their employees blog about all sorts of things - gardening, the company, etc. - and showed how it actually helped the company overall. It was over ruled as a "potential security issue". Now, the CEO blogs and is talking with the SEC about disseminating financial information to the world via a blog.
Companies, industries, organizations...if they've been around for a bit they have a vested interested in the status quo. After all, that's a large part of what got them where they are in the first place. I understand why governments might think that way. I have a harder time supporting this notion for the marketplace. Sticking with what you know will usually just get you more of what you've already got.
Now, what are you going to do with it?
Monday, November 06, 2006
Communication
"I believe companies should be as transparent as possible with information."
Okay, that's a nice platitude...but what does it really mean? It's benign-sounding enough so that it will be difficult to disagree with the statement. It's ambiguous enough that one can't really hold the speaker accountable without more specific information. Much is left up to the speaker to define the terms for themselves, ex post facto.
We're not quite at this point yet, but soon one will begin to argue that without a strong, fully diversified online presence, companies will not be doing all they can to communicate to their various constituents.
Here are several recent examples (and there are more I can share) of what I am talking about:
1. Look at what Sun Microsystems is doing
2. Look at what Toyota and Adidas are doing; even The Economist is taking note
3. Listen to what National Public Radio (NPR) had to say about it this morning
No, this isn't a plug for Second Life or it's non-virtual company, Linden Lab.
It's about being flexible enough to adjust your approach to reach your existing markets in new ways. It's about being courageous enough to let go or test firmly held opinions about "how things should be done".
That's a challenge in any world, with or without any kind of intervention - from government, the marketplace or otherwise.
What are you doing about it for your company and it's brand? What are you doing about it for you and your own brand? And how are you involving those important to your success - your customers, peers, etc. - versus just "going it alone?"
Okay, that's a nice platitude...but what does it really mean? It's benign-sounding enough so that it will be difficult to disagree with the statement. It's ambiguous enough that one can't really hold the speaker accountable without more specific information. Much is left up to the speaker to define the terms for themselves, ex post facto.
We're not quite at this point yet, but soon one will begin to argue that without a strong, fully diversified online presence, companies will not be doing all they can to communicate to their various constituents.
Here are several recent examples (and there are more I can share) of what I am talking about:
1. Look at what Sun Microsystems is doing
2. Look at what Toyota and Adidas are doing; even The Economist is taking note
3. Listen to what National Public Radio (NPR) had to say about it this morning
No, this isn't a plug for Second Life or it's non-virtual company, Linden Lab.
It's about being flexible enough to adjust your approach to reach your existing markets in new ways. It's about being courageous enough to let go or test firmly held opinions about "how things should be done".
That's a challenge in any world, with or without any kind of intervention - from government, the marketplace or otherwise.
What are you doing about it for your company and it's brand? What are you doing about it for you and your own brand? And how are you involving those important to your success - your customers, peers, etc. - versus just "going it alone?"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
