 |
| About the Silicon Valley model |
Is
the Silicon Valley model depleted? Apple and Twitter lose bellows in
front of Google and Facebook-the DiarioHablé with Marta Garijo, of El
Diario, on the recent results presented by Apple and the alleged crisis
of the model of Silicon Valley, a topic in which I decidedly have the
impression that they tend to mix many ideas and concepts. Yesterday,
Marta published her news, titled "is the Silicon Valley model depleted?"
Apple and Twitter lose bellows against Google and Facebook "(in pdf),
and quoted some of my comments.
To
begin with, the results of Apple did not seem bad to me at all. At this
point, to understand that the models of unlimited growth do not exist
and penalize a company for it seems to me a good proof of how bad
financial markets are as a way of calculating the real value of nothing.
Apple has raised the reinvention of many products and categories, and
will continue to do so, because it is in the way of considering
innovation. That the iphone park, the basic foundation of the company's
revenue, advances to more or less pace depends on many factors, among
others the awareness that it is a sufficiently powerful device for the
use that we give or not, and at this time, we clearly seem to be in a
waiting bar: Our terminals offer us the benefits that we need for the
use that we give them. There will, of course, be new uses, new apps and
new possibilities, and we'll return to rapid growth rates in that area.
Apple has already been there, and has recovered on other occasions
perfectly, with simply putting on the market a new edition of iphone.
Apple's business model, which combines advances in market share with,
above all, advances in customer share, continues to have very good
health: every year, users of products of the brand continue to go
through an Apple Store physical or virtual, spending a little more
money, and being apparently delighted with it.
Google
advances in stock valuation, competes with Apple for the right to
consider the most valuable company in the world, and although it still
has a pathological dependence on its income from a model that can have
its obvious limitations, it seems to have understood fantastically well
the idea of combating the isomorphism and preservation of innovation
with the definition of alphabet as holding business. As in the previous
case, if this is a crisis, I want to be in crisis tomorrow.
Facebook
is another similar case. If anyone can imagine sitting on top of a
watchtower that allows an immediate look at the interests of more than
one thousand six hundred million people around the world, will
understand what this company is worth and the things it can consider
doing. No, you will not grow your whole life at the same rate because
you would run out of people in the world, but it certainly continues to
grow in its model of use, in the options it offers, on the way to
becoming the site in which more users access news, and in a contribution
of value that does not seem at all to be in crisis , to the point of
being able to continue to pay-although sometimes they are absurd
amounts-by any indication of anything that can come to raise competition
to its model of attention.
Twitter?
Clearly, a different problem. We talk about a fall in the value of the
action very significant from the values of its IPO that places it as a
possible target for acquisitions, of a complex directive transition, and
of a company that, although no one among the well-informed business
world or among public figures discusses its value proposition, finds
problems defining it when we talk about common users , from the base of
the pyramid. A company or a celebrity understands perfectly Twitter as a
communication tool, of customer service or advertising of great value,
that if it did not exist would have to invent ... but the user number
does not grow, because the average user no longer knows for what the
heck serves Twitter, nor to update there. Does it still make sense to
share a mundane moment in my life, or not? Is it interesting to share
news that seems relevant to me? Do I risk being labeled one way or
another? How is my use of Twitter reflected and what consequences can it
have? More and more users are on Twitter as mere lurkers, as passive
consumers, and the company has obvious growth problems, which will
continue to have as long as it does not find an adequate way to explain
to the average user its model of use and its value proposition.
Silicon
Valley model crisis? Silicon Valley is not a model. It is an ecosystem
in which people with interesting ideas, good developers capable of
converting these ideas into executable code, a first-rate education and
an avid capital of investment opportunities have been managed to
converge. I really doubt that this model will ever be in crisis, as much
as they can even say the capricious financial ratings. All the
countries of the world would give anything to have their Silicon Valley,
because it is the best known model so far of continuous generation of
relevant innovation. If that's a crisis, again: I'd like to be in one.
0 comentarios: