Category: economy

Overselling technology

Do technologists promise too much?

“We’d like to allow remote band members – say a violinist in the Australian outback – be able to participate in an orchestra as if they were there. We hope the NBN will be able to do this.”

When the band organiser said this at a business roundtable all the technologists, myself included, choked.

There are many things the Australian National Broadband Network will deliver but the ability to teleport a violinist from the outback to downtown Sydney or Melbourne isn’t one of them.

One of the problems with technology is we tend to oversell the immediate effects; as Bill Gates famously said “The impact of all new technologies is overestimated in the short term but under estimated in the long term.”

Because we tend to sell the immediate sizzle, customers are disappointed when our promises don’t eventuate. In the decade it takes to win them back, those initial benefits we didn’t deliver in six months have become commonplace.

This is probably one of the reasons why businesses are reluctant to invest in new technology or online services; they’ve heard the promises before and they don’t trust what they can hear.

In the late 1990s businesses spent tens of thousands – sometimes millions – establishing websites that didn’t work. Those financial scars still hurt when they hear talk, some of them are still paying off those sites. So it’s barely surprising they are reluctant to return to a sector that has now matured.

Perhaps it’s best to underpromise; instead of cloud computer vendors committing themselves to 80% savings and social media experts promising millions of customers from their new viral video, it may be better to be more realistic with the expectations.

Customers have become deaf to wonderful promises, they are expecting us to deliver. Promising the world is no longer a business strategy.

Similar posts:

Irrelevance and the media

Real problems are ignored as the big boys play games

It’s a shame we weren’t around when dinosaurs became extinct. Then again, maybe we are.

News Limited business commentator Terry McCrann writes about the “Bleakest of views from the shopfronts” in his Sunday column describing the problems of retail.

All of the problems Terry cited are from big retailers – Woolworths, Dick Smith, Harvey Norman and JB HiFi. To make it clear he was talking about corporate issues there’s even a reference to General Motors.

Nowhere does Terry talk about smaller businesses or those challenging the big guys, folk like Ruslan Kogan or the Catch of the Day team. It’s all about the big end of town.

Terry’s article illustrates the problem of relying on incumbent mainstream media commentary; that it is Big Media talking about Big Business and Big Government.

“Small”, “ordinary” or “average” has no place in their conversation, if you can call the pronouncement of mainstream media commentators a conversation at all.

We can understand this – for a journalist, it’s good for the ego and career to look like a “heavy hitter” in big business. For the politician, small business and community groups can’t pay the speaking and consulting fees paid by corporations to supplement their meagre retirement benefits.

Increasingly what happens in the corporate board rooms or the once smoke filled rooms of political caucuses is out of touch with the real world.

This has become particularly acute since the responses to the 2008 crash proved to the management classes that their bonuses and perks will be protected by government bailouts regardless of how many billions of shareholder wealth they manage to destroy.

In the United States we see this in political controversies being focused on contraception – an issue settled forty years ago – while the country faces fundamental challenges to its economic base and the basic welfare of its citizens and industries.

While in Australia the media ‘insiders’ rabbit on about pointless internal party politics and soothing articles on how everything else is fine, we just need to be more optimistic. Yet the real questions about how we take advantage of the country’s greatest export boom, position the economy for the next 50 years and the nation’s dependence on the Chinese economy are being ignored.

Terry McCrann’s story is emblematic of just how out of touch Big Media, and their friends in Big Business and Big Government, are with the real world.

All we can do is let them get on with it and not take them too seriously.

Similar posts:

Why we should give Gerry Harvey a break

Big retail’s problems could be ours as well

Gerry Harvey’s been having a bad year. This time last year he was moaning about the Internet stealing his business and now his profits are down.

In Mark Fletcher’s Newsagency Blog, Gerry gets a serve for dragging the entire retail channel down.

Mark quite rightly points out that Gerry’s problems are of his own making and his chain’s difficulties aren’t necessarily those of the rest of the industry or even shared by individual franchises within the Harvey Norman group.

While I’ve been as critical of Gerry as anybody else, maybe it’s time to give him a break.

It’s worth considering how Gerry made his billions. When he started in business in the late 1950s, it was tough for the average person to get credit. At best working families could get something put aside at the local store or enter into an Encyclopedia Britannica style subscription plan.

Gerry and his generation of retailers changed that. They made credit available to the masses who could suddenly afford to buy household appliances and electrical goods without years of savings.

I remember my parents buying things from Norman Ross, Waltons or the ACTU’s Burke Street store (Bob Hawke once stepped on my mum’s foot while she was shopping for a sofe) because working class people could get credit there.

Gerry was at the beginning of the consumer revolution that defined the second half of the Twentieth Century.

In the late 1980s financial deregulation changed the game again and Gerry’s business took off as credit became even easier to get with new providers entering the market. First we saw three month interest free offers and by the mid-2000s six year interest free deals were available.

These deals were so good that Harvey Norman franchisees often made more money selling the credit deals than on the actually product that the ‘no interest’ loan had been taken out to buy.

For Gerry, this was insanely lucrative as his business was able to clip the ticket at almost every level of the retail and distribution chain while moving much of the risk and capital cost onto franchisees and landlords hungry for high traffic anchor tenants.

In 2008 this entire model changed as the credit boom came to a crashing halt and consumer spending with it.

Business models based on cheap credit now have to find something else that works and this is what Gerry Harvey is now struggling with.

To complicate matters, the Internet has changed the distribution model that worked for Harvey Norman and other bricks and mortar retailers. All of them are now having to make a major shift in the sales cultures.

Adapting to this new world is tough for everybody and we should have some sympathy for Gerry Harvey as our businesses and jobs are being affected by exactly the same forces.

How Gerry adapts, or doesn’t, could be a bellwether for our own industries.

Similar posts:

Competing in a high cost world

Business can compete when costs are high and currencies are strong

It’s often said that Australian businesses can’t compete and the nation can no longer can support manufacturing or high tech industries.

With the high Australian dollar, many economists, business leaders and politicians have said industries have to adapt to being an expensive economy. Interestingly, few of these experts explain how businesses should, or can, adapt.

At the recent Kickstart forum I had the opportunity to meet two Australian companies succeeding with high tech products and using the high dollar to their advantage.

David Jackman of Pronto Software, a thirty year old business intelligence company, is proud of the fact the business he leads does most of its development in Australia. As business owned by it’s employees – Pronto had  an employee buy out in the late 1990s – he sees his role as building the business to last centuries like some European businesses.

Linus Chang developed his Melbourne based business, Backup Assist, when he discovered the data backup tools built into Microsoft Windows weren’t very good. Taking the basic Microsoft products, he added the features that made these tools usuable at a fraction of the cost of bigger companies’ data backup software.

Today Backup Assist is sold in 124 countries with the US as the biggest market.

Both Backup Assist and Pronto find keeping the bulk of the software development in house in Australia makes sure they are producing high quality, effective products.

Software development isn’t the only sector dealing with the high cost evironment, David Jackman says Pronto has many customers in the Australian manufacturing industry who have adapted to a high cost environment with niche and high value added products.

Identifying these opportunities is where the challenge lies; what do our businesses do well that customers in international markets are prepared to pay for?

We also have an advantage in being a relatively open economy with first world standards. This is another reason why investment in new infrastructure like the National Broadband Network is important.

One thing is for sure, selling low priced commodity products with small margins is not where the future lies, even if the Aussie dollar collapses.

We have success stories and businesses adapting to being a high cost economy, it’s a matter of understanding how our industries can add value while  do this.

Similar posts:

The need for speed

What do we need fast Internet for anyway?

I’m at the Kickstart Forum for IT journalists on the Gold Coast this weekend talking to various companies and technology thought leaders on the direction of the industry.

For the forum’s opening keynote, opposition spokesperson and former Optus telecommunications executive Paul Fletcher described his concerns about the Australian government’s National Broadband Network.

Many of Paul’s objections to the project are based on the failure of former attempts to build telecommunications networks – citing Aussat, the NextGen fibre network, OneTel and international disappointments like WorldCom and Global Crossing.

The other main concern is that no-one will use it. He cites a Parliamentary committee that where eHealth providers said their service could be adequately provided by a 512Kbit connection, a tiny fraction of the 100Mbit speed promised by the NBN.

Previous failures aren’t a good indicator of the success or otherwise of the NBN, but what’s more important is what a poor job industry’s doing in explaining how high speed Internet can help their businesses.

The big challenge for NBN advocates who believe this project is the essential infrastructure of the 21st Century, is to articulate the benefits and potential. We’re not doing a very good job at the moment.

What’s your view on how high speed Internet can help your business or community?

Similar posts:

Is the problem in the cockpit?

Who is in control anyway?

In the Daily Reckoning newsletter editor Callum Newman uses Malcolm Gladwell’s description of power relationships to draw a parallel between Korean pilots crashing planes into mountains and the economy, pointing out our politicians are like distracted, doomed aviators ignoring the obvious features they about to collide with.

Is that fair though? In a plane the passengers are strapped in their seats and have to take their the pilots in trust, in real life we have control — all of our actions affect the vehicle that is our economy.

Unlike a plane we can jump out and do our own thing, we can refuse to buy one good or service and we can set up a business for ourselves when we see a market that isn’t being serviced.

Where the analogy does work though is our politicians – and many business leaders – aren’t paying attention to major demographic and economic shifts.

The question is “why?” Most of these people aren’t stupid and they have access to better information than most of us, which is one of the reasons they are in power.

Perhaps it’s because we don’t want to hear the truth; that our assumptions about what the state will provide and how our economy is developing are flawed.

In many ways, particularly in a modern Western democracy, our politician are mirrors of ourselves. They tell is what they think we’d like to hear.

The problem isn’t in the cockpit, it’s back at the boarding gate where we’re more worried whether we’ll get a packet of nuts than whether we should agree to embark on a rough journey to a destination we don’t expect.

Similar posts:

Finance by the masses

Can crowdfunding work for business?

“Crowd” is one of the hot terms of the moment – the idea that groups of connected, motivated people with the right incentives can deliver great value when their skills and talents are bought together.

One of application of this idea is crowdfunding where businesses, artists, writer and movie producers can call  on the community to donate or invest small sums into a project in return for a benefit like a copy of the book or being an extra in the movie.

The biggest success in this space is the New York based Kickstarter which was founded in 2008. Pozible, an Australian equivalent, that provides local creatives with the opportunity to raise funds without dealing with the hassles of US bank accounts or social security numbers.

Both of these services make money from taking a commission on the money raised, for Pozible users this fee ranges from 5 to 7.5%.

While the focus of Pozible and Kickstarter is on creative projects like books, music and movies, it’s interesting to consider how this model can work for other businesses.

Perhaps an IT business can offer a free year of support or food delivery service free shipping in return for a donation. The possibilities are endless.

It’s not without risks – there’s no doubt the regulators will at best be suspicious of fund raising through these services and anyone participating has to accept the risk of not getting any sort of return.

Since the 2008 banking crisis, funding for small business has dried up around the world. Many viable enterprises found their lines of credit being withdrawn and some even went under as a result.

With banks rationing small business credit, there’s a need – we could even argue an economic necessity – for alternative sources of capital. Crowdsourcing could be an option.

Now the days of easy credit are over; businesses, banks, investors and governments have to adapt. Believing models and regulations that were designed when capital was cheap and abundant won’t work in a very changed economy.

Crowdsourcing will be one of the issues confronting regulators, it’s going to be interesting to see how they deal with it.

Similar posts: