Great topic and great article!
I love how the digital revolution has democratized videogame development through tools (such as unity) or access to finance (through kickstarter or indiegogo). This has lead to much more new indie games eating away the revenues of the big studios and their AAA games. What we see in your article is how Hello games has done something that only AAA were allowed to do before because of their size and renown: release an unfinished game. This is a slippery slope to go down, Hello will probably never be taken seriously and might have damaged the who indie industry by reducing the trust in the system.
Sujay, one thought came to my mind while I was reading the article and it is how much talent would be wasted if only those actively looking for work are included. A vast majority of the people working in professional services may be ready to move on to a new job at the right offer, but might not have the time to actually open an account Hired and all of the similar pages out there.
I agree that the current model is probably inefficient and needs a redo, but I don’t know if this industry will be completely digitized.
Very interesting article, Fangfang! I had two questions about the future of tenpay.
Regarding their shift towards profitability: After what we have seen about freemium models and Rdio during our marketing class, how do you think that tenpay si going to be affected once they start charging fees for payments to make the whole thing more profitable? Aren’t they afraid that once they do this a smaller player with deeper pockets (e.g., Alibaba) starts stealing customers away from them?
Secondly, what does it take for a foreign tech company to break into the Chinese market? Is it that for digital products Chinese only like their own products or is it that foreigners don’t understand their needs? I am asking this because a few months ago Uber had to cut their losses in China, just as eBay and just as Paypal
I really enjoyed the article, David. I would like to get your opinion on whether bank will be able to migrate all their products to mobile. For instance, I don’t know if someone would be willing to take a 500k mortgage or 200k educational loan through the web. It is not like I don’t trust online transactions, but my potential loss, even if the likelihood that I am going to get scammed is small, could be huge. I think most people, myself included would prefer to go to a branch at least to sign the paperwork!
I wrote about the air transportation industry and had no idea about the magnitude of the problem in shipping, the numbers are truly mesmerizing. From my experience with airlines, I will tell you that they won’t do anything unless a multilateral body with punitive powers requires it. In the frame of the Paris they managed to discuss about it and this talks have resulted in a binding agreement just one year afterwards. The fact that shipping is in general a very unsustainable business affecting water and wildlife on top of emitting vast quantities of CO2 leads me to believe that we are not far away from such day in which an overarching policy is reach. When that day comes, SkySails stock will feel the thrust.
Interesting article on the reason and advantages of an integration. However, I would like to push you on this topic a little bit. Given the current financial situation of both Tesla and Solar City, do you think this is the right time to do this acquisition? Even before the stakeholders have approved it?
To me it seems like Elon is just trying to save a doubtful bet with a great (but probably hyped) bet and that in the end he might lose two and what is worst, we might miss a company that is seriously pushing the boundaries of what we thought was possible on an electric car. Additionally, is Elon Musk doing disservice to the the stakeholders that trusted him by looking more after the environmental impact rather than the monetary impact that they were looking for?
In case you would like to read further on the financial situation, refer to the following article which discusses how both share prices have fallen, implying that the parts are more valuable separate than as a whole.
It is interesting to see an example of a company that is having a very positive impact in society without aiming explicitly to do so. From what I understand they have been able to grow at incredible rates and maintain market leadership just by offering a product that delivers great value to the user (less leakage) rather than because they sell a sustainable product that hipsters might be attracted to.
This is a way for supporting sustainability is often deprioritized because it does not grant the same PR as CSR. My hypothesis is: in the future, having a product that promotes sustainable practices on top excelling at its core functionalities, will prove to be an edge given the current paranoia around climate change.
It also great to see that this company will keep having enormous growth due to new regulations coming into place all over the world. It just leaves me wondering whether this won’t attract new competition; if the company should put strategic measures in place to develop new products; and whether those new products could properly compete if they lack the amazing impact that the carbon filters provide, given that sustainability is more of a concern now.
Great article that summarizes most of the root causes that have lead to the current energy crisis in Spain.
You finish your article claiming that the left wing parties should put their money were their mouth is. The problem is that most government policies have little short term effect and the results are hard to attribute to the party that promoted them. On climate change this issue is exacerbated, because the consequences are long term and some parties use this to their short-term advantage. To support this long term myopia I will add some facts: (i) Spain is the country with most international arbitration processes open in the world thanks to Zapatero’s subsidy policies, (ii) Spanish people have one of the most expensive electric tariff in Europe and (iii) the conservative party recently passed a law to dissuade people from installing solar panels because we have excess capacity.
In conclusion, it might be enticing to lure in the voters who want to to have their cake (renewables everywhere) and it eat to (cheap), but climate change is an issue where policymakers should agree, instead of putting rock on the way of the others.
This is a very interesting take on united and the potential implications of climate change in their business. However, I am a little bit skeptical on the effect that they can actually have on the general flying conditions. I have only been able to find one source that supports this fact while keeping a scientific approach (https://www.rt.com/news/climate-change-air-travel-science-transatlantic-541/). Did you find some other supporting evidence?
Additionally, as you may know, the ICAO has recently reach an agreement signed by over 190 governments. What is United’s expected reaction to the new agreement? Are they going to be part of the first wave? Are they going to delay investments to get a better baseline?