Charles Murray makes an interesting case on how we might break the back of the regulatory state. His concluding remarks are especially poignant. Grab a coffee and put in the buds. And I say, bring on the Madison Fund!
They used to call it competitiveness—a word fraught with the implication that others might win. Now it has been elevated to innovation, a more regal way to describe what business has always done: Adapt.
Interesting piece this morning in the Wall Street Journal on Google’s strategy on smart phones and devices. Might Google Have a Sly Motive Behind Motorola? (Sorry, behind the pay wall.)
The author’s premise is that Google has no intention to ever make money on handsets or software, but rather is attempting to kill the profitability of these markets.
What if profits aren’t part of the plan at Motorola Mobility (which Google purchased in 2011)? What if Google’s plan for smartphones isn’t to directly make money for itself but, instead, an attempt to destroy money for other companies by making the phone a commodity device?
The author posits that Google’s ultimate goal is to protect and extend their dominant position in internet interaction and their lucrative advertising streaming. In simple terms, Google’s intent appears to be to “drain the swamp” of device and software profit pools so that device and software players cannot direct consumers away from Google’s internet franchise.
Certainly the data on mobile device market share suggests this is happening. Blackberry has crumbled and Android has become the big leader. Apple operates more and more as the minority player (a replay of Mac vs. PC). And lately, Apple seems to be taking the bait with introducing “low price” versions of the iPhone.
Where does this end up? And where are the hues and cries about predatory behavior? Intentional loss of money by Google’s device division (which appears to be the case) would normally be a sign of trouble. And again, what’s the definition of evil?
After a long weekend by a lake in southern Illinois, it’s time to get back to blogging. Especially to download on the excellent insights and fellowship enjoyed at Reconverge:G2 last week in Indianapolis.
First, big thanks to Gail King at Eli Lilly for hosting and to Aurora WDC for running the show. Also, next time you find yourself in Indianapolis, try the Alexander Hotel. Very stylish and modern, very comfortable, and located close to all the hip joints in downtown Indy.
Over the coming days, I’ll post more specifics, especially from the Thursday program that we premiered in the Reconverge Blog series last week. But here are a couple of great top lines from Wednesday’s keynote, Peter Johnson, VP of Strategic Planning at Eli Lilly.
These come from Peter’s 20 years of trying to manage and make use of Competitive Intelligence in strategic planning at the senior executive level. What he said resonates strongly with my experience over the years sitting on the other side of the table: