Travel 20/09/03
Why � what a waste of time effort and thought.
Big Companies 20/09/03
My silence has been due to travel. Some of which was spent in and around the Sun Convention in SF. My apologies to them for taking direct grief on this I am sure that they are no worse, and probably better than IBM, HP et al.
However, in a series of meetings which should be of some importance to Sun executives, especially as they were directly relevant to today�s announced job cuts, we met partially informed senior execs who had precisely 45 minutes for us before being moved on to the next meeting. All the follow up was left to a junior, but very keen, middle manager who relied on them remembering these meetings to push her agenda.
I was impressed by Jonathon Shwartz�s presentation at the same convention. But its difficult not to be cynical when you know that his contact with even 2 layers down in his organization is probably very limited. Who really �owns� Star Office? Or was it a big joke perpetrated by a very keen strategy exec who was promoted before his project came to fruition. This is not a condemnation of Star Office 7; I�ve yet to install it.
Sequoia / University of California 20/09/03
I read an appalling article Monday�s (8 Sept �03) FT (I�m offline and cannot link) on the Sequoia / University of California affair. The FT is a respected financial newspaper, but if it cannot write an intelligent, informed piece on disclosure then Sequoia is right not to disclose � and inherently I believe that Sequoia is wrong. Disclosure should never be wrong. Ask the NYSE Comp committee.
The Telecom Market � First Written 9/9/03
Thank goodness for quiet Aeroflot flights to, well, anywhere. A chance for thought that is only otherwise found at the dacha.
Do deals end up being interesting because they are inherently interesting; market, timing, potential, management etc., or because we, founts of all wisdom and knowledge decide that they are? Not really that important because a. it�s rhetorical and b. it�s mostly a self-fulfilling prophesy. The purpose of the question is a lead in to my thought for now.
There are a pile of deals sitting in the inbox (definition; not yet enough known to a. syndicate, b. understand, c. spend any money on) of which two in particular are of interest because of other investments. Both of them address the way that we will use mobiles, PDA�s and Smart Phones. One is Asia / Euro-centric, the other US-centric. That is; the former is a teenage / young adult consumer model, the latter principally business related. Neither management understand the others business model. How much of our interest has been piqued by related interests? More importantly how much has been missed in other deals because we just don�t possess enough knowledge. Let�s not even go down that path.
As some idle journalists have noted, a pile of cash has been wasted on telecom infrastructure investments. Now, it would appear that the carriers want something to show for that investment. However, whilst some of us were willing to pay $500+ for a handset in the early days of Russian mobile, and the ability to speak was the killer application. The world has moved on and the next app isn�t as easy as your voice but may actually be your voice and�(well if I knew you can be damn sure that I would not tell you.) It may be a bundle of apps, personalization � think ring tones with pictures, cheap voice (apparently known as VoIP.) What is clear, is that it is not clear. Voice is applicable to everyone. A 40+ year old businessman is not interested in a personalized ring tone, much, but he probably wants to stop carrying a ton of electronic hardware in his briefcase. A kid (when do you stop being a kid?) could not give a damn about synced schedules, to do lists and contacts; they are probably however interested in personalization, anonymization (apologies) and low cost high cool factor frequently accessed and changed apps.
All of which goes to say that the carriers need to spread their nets wider. Stop trying to build a wall around the garden and build an infrastructure that allows both the post-paid businessman and the pre-paid kid to co-exist on one network with multiple marketing opportunities.
20 September 2003
Travel 20/09/03
Why � what a waste of time effort and thought.
Big Companies 20/09/03
My silence has been due to travel. Some of which was spent in and around the Sun Convention in SF. My apologies to them for taking direct grief on this I am sure that they are no worse, and probably better than IBM, HP et al.
However, in a series of meetings which should be of some importance to Sun executives, especially as they were directly relevant to today�s announced job cuts, we met partially informed senior execs who had precisely 45 minutes for us before being moved on to the next meeting. All the follow up was left to a junior, but very keen, middle manager who relied on them remembering these meetings to push her agenda.
I was impressed by Jonathon Shwartz�s presentation at the same convention. But its difficult not to be cynical when you know that his contact with even 2 layers down in his organization is probably very limited. Who really �owns� Star Office? Or was it a big joke perpetrated by a very keen strategy exec who was promoted before his project came to fruition. This is not a condemnation of Star Office 7; I�ve yet to install it.
Sequoia / University of California 20/09/03
I read an appalling article Monday�s (8 Sept �03) FT (I�m offline and cannot link) on the Sequoia / University of California affair. The FT is a respected financial newspaper, but if it cannot write an intelligent, informed piece on disclosure then Sequoia is right not to disclose � and inherently I believe that Sequoia is wrong. Disclosure should never be wrong. Ask the NYSE Comp committee.
The Telecom Market � First Written 9/9/03
Thank goodness for quiet Aeroflot flights to, well, anywhere. A chance for thought that is only otherwise found at the dacha.
Do deals end up being interesting because they are inherently interesting; market, timing, potential, management etc., or because we, founts of all wisdom and knowledge decide that they are? Not really that important because a. it�s rhetorical and b. it�s mostly a self-fulfilling prophesy. The purpose of the question is a lead in to my thought for now.
There are a pile of deals sitting in the inbox (definition; not yet enough known to a. syndicate, b. understand, c. spend any money on) of which two in particular are of interest because of other investments. Both of them address the way that we will use mobiles, PDA�s and Smart Phones. One is Asia / Euro-centric, the other US-centric. That is; the former is a teenage / young adult consumer model, the latter principally business related. Neither management understand the others business model. How much of our interest has been piqued by related interests? More importantly how much has been missed in other deals because we just don�t possess enough knowledge. Let�s not even go down that path.
As some idle journalists have noted, a pile of cash has been wasted on telecom infrastructure investments. Now, it would appear that the carriers want something to show for that investment. However, whilst some of us were willing to pay $500+ for a handset in the early days of Russian mobile, and the ability to speak was the killer application. The world has moved on and the next app isn�t as easy as your voice but may actually be your voice and�(well if I knew you can be damn sure that I would not tell you.) It may be a bundle of apps, personalization � think ring tones with pictures, cheap voice (apparently known as VoIP.) What is clear, is that it is not clear. Voice is applicable to everyone. A 40+ year old businessman is not interested in a personalized ring tone, much, but he probably wants to stop carrying a ton of electronic hardware in his briefcase. A kid (when do you stop being a kid?) could not give a damn about synced schedules, to do lists and contacts; they are probably however interested in personalization, anonymization (apologies) and low cost high cool factor frequently accessed and changed apps.
All of which goes to say that the carriers need to spread their nets wider. Stop trying to build a wall around the garden and build an infrastructure that allows both the post-paid businessman and the pre-paid kid to co-exist on one network with multiple marketing opportunities.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment