Interesting post! I think the big issue you pointed out was not the lack of focus (offering a variety of types of products) but cycling through them so quickly that Quirky didn’t have time to make “okay” products versus “great” products. I also wonder if it would have been better for them to have a vertically integrated process if they did want to release so many products and have such a variety, while still exhibiting control. Either way, I agree with you that Quirky was doomed to fail because of its business model.
Interesting post about something in our own backyard! I wonder, though, if one of the reasons for the rise in digital books and ordering from Amazon is the ease of having the book readily on your device (e.g., Kindle, iPad). Now, consumers to not have to lug around heavy books with them. If this can explain some of the rise in digitalization, then the EBM will not solve the fundamental problem of customers still going online to buy their books.
Interesting post! Do you think that there will be a way around the potential cyber-security threat? If nations need to share data with each other, it seems that the sending of any information necessarily opens up the potential for threats. Is it wiser to think of a way that the nations do not need to share the data inter-country? I would also be concerned on if there are any false negatives, as these seem more problematic than false positives.
Thanks for the provocative post! I completely understand the more cynical side of thinking Facebook limited the number of websites/apps that could be accessed to gain market share. I wonder if any of this is related to costing as well. Would the free internet be more costly if all the internet was available, just due to the broadband needed and how often it would be accessed? I can imagine with limited apps the use would be less because there is not as much need to be constantly online. Just a thought on if the economics of the limited internet might have prompted them to initially restrict the free usage. Would it have been better to restrict to a certain amount of time or bandwidth?
Interesting post! One question/concern that came to my mind (especially based on the cases this week) is that of privacy. In a world where hacking is commonplace and Google has a sufficient amount of data on where people traveled, I can see this becoming problematic for high-profile individuals should this information become public knowledge (e.g., Watergate scandal). What is Google doing outside of Brillo to increase security in the age of IoT?
Thanks for the insightful post on Ford. It is great to hear that the company is focusing on several differentiated strategies not only to mitigate its role in climate change, but also the role of consumers through more energy-efficient cars. Taking a more cynical approach, I wonder how much of Ford’s production of energy-efficient cars, particularly electric cars, is done for marketing and PR purposes, especially given the industry’s reputation in relation to climate change. Do you believe that Ford thinks consumers will buy electric cars? Although Tesla has been successful in this space, I wonder if that is because it is marketed as a luxury brand.
Also, what are your thoughts related to Ford’s third point on a predictable market for GHG emissions? As we saw in FIN class related to carbon credits, this market is prone to breaking down and there is no one right answer. As such, I think this piece of Ford’s goals will be harder to attain.
I think that it is great for a predominately oil-based company to be focused on sustainability. However, I question how much change BP itself can institute. If consumers demand oil – whether for transportation or other industries – will BP try to shift consumers to a more energy-efficient source, such as natural gas, or deny them their purchase? While I applaud BP’s efforts to be more sustainable, I wonder if the company will cave to the pressure of the customer and continue to provide what is demanded, no matter the environmental cost.
Great post, Josue! Has UPS looked into potentially reducing both costs and emissions by making sure that trucks, flights, etc. are full? Having non-full delivery vehicles can easily increase GHG emissions as more vehicles are needed to make the same amount of deliveries. The clear pushback to this idea would be that waiting until full-loads might decrease the speed of delivery. As such, I wonder if there is some way UPS can determine the cost-benefit to price packages so that most people would choose the full-truck option.
I really liked the questions posed in this blog. After reading, it seems that Waupaca is not incentivized to change their methods due to low margins and the competitiveness of the business. My key question though is if Waupaca might be incentivized to change if end-consumers become more aware of the effects of foundries and instigate the change. For example, if Deere’s end consumers want only environmentally-conscious products, might they push Deere to not work with Waupaca?
It seems like one of the key challenges for HEI is making the transition fully to renewable resources; due to a lack of capital, HEI is transition to liquid nitrogen as a stepping stone before going to renewables. As a public company, it would seem that capital should not be a problem as HEI can raise more equity or potentially take out debt. Given the potential profits available to HEI by reducing the costs for electricity, it would seem like investors would leap at the opportunity to move to renewables. Therefore, I wonder why the intermediate step to liquid nitrogen is necessary.
Thanks for the insightful post – I had no idea that Hawaii had the highest energy costs and how reliant the state is on oil!
I think this post sparks an interesting debate as the airline industry is less in the limelight compared to other transportation sources (e.g., cars, buses, etc.) regarding sustainability. As such, I think it is important to consider the impact of biofuel in the airline industry. However, currently only mixes of up to 20% biofuel have proven successful. Is 100% biofuel even possible and how far into the future will this occur? I wonder if time would be better spend in R&D looking at different energy sources (outside of solar and electrical).
Moreover, I wonder how much of the responsibility for innovating in this industry stems from plane manufacturers and how much from airline operators. Even if Boeing comes up with a design that allows for 100% biofuels, the entire airline industry would need to adapt to this change, including Airbus, which makes me think this is an innovation further down the line.