Washington Post article on Facebook
As of today the value of Facebook has lost $40 billion since its IPO according to the Washington Post article referenced above. Although I am a Facebook user, I am not a big fan. My issues with Facebook are the same as I have with Apple products. Neither company does a good job of explaining the bells and whistles of their products. If you are a iPhone user, like I am, you probably were surprised, like I was, when you opened your new phone box and discovered a one page instruction manual. Now granted I am sure everything you could ever want to know is in the "cloud," but couldn't they have at least explained how to get to the cloud on the back of their one page instruction manual?
If you are like me and don't eat your lunch in a cafeteria surrounded by chatty classmates, your friends are not likely to share discoveries of new iPhone features. I am in a group that learns by studying an instruction manual, and not listening to friends or reading texts.
Facebook provides the same hurdle for me. I just do not have enough social interaction about cool stuff to figure it out. From my perspective Facebook lacks a mature business perspective. The first responsibility of a company is to know their customer. Knowing a customer requires categorizing and analyzing the customer so their expectations can be met. There is at least one segment of the Facebook customer pool that is not being investigated!
The second responsibility of a company is to understand what they are selling. Facebook is nearly blind in this arena. Their Mr. Magoo vision into their product offering is disconcerting. It is disconcerting since they do not explain it to their customer. One of their largest products is space for displaying photos. Why not organize photos by categories? Why not have navigation systems for the "organized" albums. Each of these add on features could be charged a fee. Aah Ha, a monetary return is invented. Will people pay to have a "cool" page? Of course, they will. Today Facebook is essentially giving away "free stuff." This is not the best strategy to make money. I know they sell ads, but everybody sells ads. Why can't they step up and do something besides cluttering each page with ads?
Facebook has done some things right, but they seem unaware of what they have created. One example is the "Like" thumbs up graphic. This alone is a brilliant idea that properly used could generate millions of dollars in revenue. I am going to avoid explaining how this could be used, because that is what I sell (organizing raw business ideas into profitable endeavors). Certainly, any "great" business analyst could take the "Like" idea and turn the money making machine into high gear. A good business is one that not only has a lot of customers, but one that sells what their customers want.
Thursday, August 16, 2012
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Japanese Interest Rates
Economist article
One of the baffling economic mysteries of the past twenty years is how the government of Japan is able to sell debt to their citizens at near zero interest rates. In an article published in the Economist on August 14, 2012 titled Defying gravity the mystifying Japanese investors' motives are explored. The author explains that if the Japanese investor used rational analysis they would not accept the low yields of the country's debt. He states numerous advanced countries offer higher rates. He questions whether solvency of Japan is ensured when the countries debt is over 230% of GDP. Even considering all those factors a Japanese investor must still be giving an unrealistic value to debt that yields less than 2% the author argues.
The author makes some good arguments, but he should read Dan Ariely's book, Predictably Irrational, to understand what is going on. The Japanese investor is not making a rational decision. Investors have the right and often do choose investments not based solely on yield. Many angel investors make investments in projects that have little chance of success, but they feel some pull to try to challenge the inevitable even though the odds are ridiculously low. Clearly, Japanese investors feel it is important to support the home team even when the returns are extremely low. The author believes the day of reckoning is getting closer for Japanese bond dealers. Step back, the motives for purchasing will not change with worsening economic conditions in Japan. The Japanese investor is on board is unlikely to jump ship.
Next, the author proposes that the reason for this anomaly is government persuasion or regulatory manipulation. This is an explanation I can support. Please see the last half of my new book, Rule of Money: a solution to the global debt crisis. I discuss the long history of government managing the economic system within their borders to benefit themselves. On the other hand, most people believe government is working to secure the public's best interests, but this is contrary to the most basic tenet of economics: we act in own best interests. People in government are no different from you and I. They are going to do what secures their future first, and then if any money is left over, take care of the citizenry.
The author concludes foretelling disaster, maybe not tomorrow, but soon. I am not so sure. The author assumes that eventually, foreign lenders will be the only recourse and, of course, they will demand higher rates. Think about it. Is it possible foreign banks might buy the debt and sell options to gain on the likely lost in value compared to the purchaser's own currency. In fact, the opportunities through the option market regardless of the face value of the debt is always a factor. I suspect issuing debt in the future will be more about dealing the cards for another round of poker and less about the cost of the cards. The game will continue and Japan is positioned to continue playing.
One of the baffling economic mysteries of the past twenty years is how the government of Japan is able to sell debt to their citizens at near zero interest rates. In an article published in the Economist on August 14, 2012 titled Defying gravity the mystifying Japanese investors' motives are explored. The author explains that if the Japanese investor used rational analysis they would not accept the low yields of the country's debt. He states numerous advanced countries offer higher rates. He questions whether solvency of Japan is ensured when the countries debt is over 230% of GDP. Even considering all those factors a Japanese investor must still be giving an unrealistic value to debt that yields less than 2% the author argues.
The author makes some good arguments, but he should read Dan Ariely's book, Predictably Irrational, to understand what is going on. The Japanese investor is not making a rational decision. Investors have the right and often do choose investments not based solely on yield. Many angel investors make investments in projects that have little chance of success, but they feel some pull to try to challenge the inevitable even though the odds are ridiculously low. Clearly, Japanese investors feel it is important to support the home team even when the returns are extremely low. The author believes the day of reckoning is getting closer for Japanese bond dealers. Step back, the motives for purchasing will not change with worsening economic conditions in Japan. The Japanese investor is on board is unlikely to jump ship.
Next, the author proposes that the reason for this anomaly is government persuasion or regulatory manipulation. This is an explanation I can support. Please see the last half of my new book, Rule of Money: a solution to the global debt crisis. I discuss the long history of government managing the economic system within their borders to benefit themselves. On the other hand, most people believe government is working to secure the public's best interests, but this is contrary to the most basic tenet of economics: we act in own best interests. People in government are no different from you and I. They are going to do what secures their future first, and then if any money is left over, take care of the citizenry.
The author concludes foretelling disaster, maybe not tomorrow, but soon. I am not so sure. The author assumes that eventually, foreign lenders will be the only recourse and, of course, they will demand higher rates. Think about it. Is it possible foreign banks might buy the debt and sell options to gain on the likely lost in value compared to the purchaser's own currency. In fact, the opportunities through the option market regardless of the face value of the debt is always a factor. I suspect issuing debt in the future will be more about dealing the cards for another round of poker and less about the cost of the cards. The game will continue and Japan is positioned to continue playing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)