It is sad to see because I have a long and happy relationship with yahoo, and I am very pleased with their ecommerce engine. But there is no possible way to feedback on problems experienced with their services, otherwise. The yahoo listserv may or may not send messages through, which makes for customer dissatisfaction. Maybe we are all supposed to migrate to blogs, where the service is no better.
With intellectual property rights, a time comes where there are so many cross-claims to technology that innovations stops. We have come to that point in IT.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Why Yahoo Is Failing
Why I Attend Trade Shows
Anonymous wants to know how come I attend trade shows if I find the best suppliers otherwise? I intend to attend all the shows going on during my trip to make propaganda films, but this is a one time reason.
Usually if I attend a show it is to keep up with the cutting edge, what is new. It can be useful to meet present suppliers at shows to cover business and observe the larger picture.
I am touting the shows now for another reason... say your passion is for pet toys, visiting a trade show and seeing so many people actually doing business may excite people to begin themselves.
Although I would never steal anyone's ideas at a trade show (because it would be pointless to introduce something someone else already has), I certainly engage in hegelian dialectic: a good idea is a thesis, I consider an antithesis, and come up with a synthesis. It's how innovation moves forward (in intellectual property law people try to stop progess).
So as you see these are not very strong reasons to attend trade shows, which is why I generally skip them.
Problem Of Best Supplier
When faced with a multitude of suppliers from the #1 source country for a given product or service, how do we winnow down to the best. Fastest way is to ask for references. Many will not reply, because they cannot since they are not really in business. Then check the references. Isn't it possible the process fails to get us the very best supplier... sure its possible... so maybe we only get someone in the top ten of the 200 best suppliers... but let's step back for a second...
We innovators bring new goods and services on the market. Look at the first cell phones circa 1980... look at Apple computers circa 1978.... yeecccch...
The items we introduce require a nonstandard process to produce. Possibly the gods and services require a nonstandard method to distribute. Given its tentative and exploratory nature, the process is relatively costly and cumbersome. It is management intensive. Innovative products are slow to market, relatively expensive, you have no options besides the innovative item, and they are pretty junky all things considered. Certainly it seems so in retrospect. Nonetheless, people desperately want the advantages of the first airplane, the first cell phone, the first fire insurance.
WE ever improve the item through market feedback... at some magical point, well after we have made a lot of money and dumped the item for our own purposes, having gone on to other innovations suggested by our deeper knowledge of the market... at some magical point the conservators step in and invest in the massive cost of redesigning the item to get the cheapest combination of material and workmanship and still be "shoe", and then further lower the cost in finance and distribution to make the innovative item then available to everyone. By "stealing" your idea the conservators make the item more better cheaper faster to everyone, a market that you could never reach anyway. This is how the free market is second to none in making life's material benefits and services available to all. No other system can do it, let alone match it. (It is why I am a free market anti-capitalist).
Of course, if you wish to ride your innovation down to the bottom of the market and gain compensation for your idea all of the way, you simply go the IPO route at the point your item is so popular a conservator would steal it. By an IPO you aggregate enough capital to become a conservator and lower the cost and widen access to your item.
Faced with this problem of 200 OEMs, who, being competitive, may be very similar, pick one with good references from around the world. Give them the job of samples... get enough orders to cover the suppliers minimum, and then do the deal. Based on feedback, you improve the product... at the same time you'll be learning more about suppliers. At some time you and the very best will gravitate together, or the one you start with will improve based on innovating with you and become the new #1 if not already #1
Churchill On Democracy
Churchill said democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. What I like about free-markets is they do not suffer the shortcomings inherently recognized by Churchill's bon mot. Who needs democracy when markets trump power?
Thursday, April 9, 2009
More Hong Kong
I received my passes to the Hong Kong Print Fair in the mail today, and the HKTDC included a couple of free round trip tickets from downtown out to the Expo site at the airport. Classy.
There is the gift fair, print fair, pet fair and housewares fair, all separate last two weeks, not to mention the entire Canton Fair up in Guangzhou.
Jason Checks in On The Size of Corporations
John,
I agree with the theme of your message that the size of corporations is a consequence of NDA, NCA, intellectual property, and other government monopoly privileges. To your list I would also add the tax code (both its overall complexity and its specific provisions), regulations, subsidies, and licensing. However, I got the impression from your message, perhaps unintended, that corporate size is perceived to be an unintended side effect of these things. I do not believe that it is unintended at all, rather it is the primary aim.
It is obvious that human beings are much more comfortable working in small organizations with lots of individual autonomy, rather than in large command and control structures like large corporations and the government. Language tells a very compelling story here. You never hear someone who is successful in their own small business talk of "chucking it all for my dream mid-level corporate job". Quite the contrary, it is only the people who are encountering extreme difficulties in a small organization, and their talk is always of the form "I might be _forced_ to _give this up_ and _settle for_ a corporate job in order to feed my family." Now flip the coin and consider the reverse: the successful corporate executive who nevertheless wants to "chuck it all and follow a dream of owning my own business" is a modern day archetype. When people speak of corporate jobs the language is very prison-like, with tales of backstabbing and endless dreams and plans for escape. And of course the best metaphor for a safe, good paying corporate job ever is "golden handcuffs". Retirement = release, and early retirement is parole for good behavior. :-) This language reflects an underlying attitude that persists even at high compensation levels. In fact, the more successful people become within the corporate world, the more likely they are to express a desire to escape it. It thus takes a large compensation differential to overcome the natural human aversion to working in such organizations.
This fact has been known for a long time. It applies to investments as well. All else being equal, people would prefer to invest their excess resources in endeavors that they control, or at least can see and interact with and directly benefit from, rather than numbered stock certificates in some huge, distant corporation. It is only the promise of substantially greater and more assured returns that convinces people to invest in corporations instead of small local businesses.
Nevertheless, the argument has been made that certain endeavors are impossible to undertake by small organizations either singly or in partnership. These are large, capital intensive projects.
The argument for big governments and big corporations is thus essentially the same. The government claims a monopoly on force, then uses that monopoly on force to carve out other monopolies for the benefit of big corporations. This is a deliberate act, not an unintended consequence. The rules of the game are deliberately skewed to favor the big organizations over the small ones. This is not all nest-feathering (although plenty of that goes on too). The belief is that if this is not done, almost no one would want to invest money in or go to work for a large corporation (and that much is true). The belief is, if everyone invests in their own or their friends' businesses, and everyone either works in their own business or as an employee of a small local business, no one will undertake the big projects that move society forward. So, the argument goes, government must skew the playing field enough to incentivize enough people to participate in otherwise unpleasant big organizations that can accomplish big projects that small ones can't. Whether that is a valid proposition or not is debatable, but most of American public policy since Thomas Jefferson was president has had that assumption at its base.
--Jason
Trade Buyers Wanted
Here is another link to deals for buyers heading to Hong Kong... the page also shows when various trade shows are taking place... these deals are just another way of lowering prices without being too obvious.
Only Half of People Think Socialism Over Capitalism
This result is encouraging: since I believe the systems are not much different in results, then the finding shows an expected ambivalence.
There is an alternative: free market anti-capitalism.
I expect people will not see much difference from capitalism to the fascism we will adopt now.
Exports Back to Jan 2007 Levels
But imports are falling farther... according to govt trade data. Here you can find breakdowns with more detail of what is happening.
The significance is whatever the product you wished to trade in, both the suppliers and customers are very eager indeed to see your new product ideas.
So Cap It
A story on the economic crisis hitting Vegas has a couple of points I'd challenge:
The first is that how this project goes so goes Vegas, either finish it or it goes bust. False dilemma - how about it is not finished and it turns out well.
In Seattle one of the most beautiful Churches is St. Joseph's on Capitol Hill. It was to be a twin towered neo gothic brick affair and the foundation was laid when the depression hit and the money to finish the plans dried up. Instead, the Jesuits used what money they had to finish the church in a new cheap technology of slip form continuous pour concrete, the price of which dropped, and stuck with just one tower. The thing is now an elegant alabaster beauty with a green copper roof. Blessed SAcrament in the U District lost a tower to the depression also... so, why not cap off what is in place in Vegas with what money is sunk so far, and perhaps even take advantage of what is done to make it all the more beautiful.
Some of the most beautiful apartment building in seattle where built by Anhalt who used bricks left over form the great seattle fire and depression priced wood products, of which there are about a dozen or so prized apartment buildings and homes. Loveless did something similar with his building across from the Harvard Exit theatre.
These are quality buildings made beautiful in spite of the depression (or perhaps because of the depression?) during the depression.
Another comment in the article is building inspectors found problems that cost money to fix. In a free market it would be insurers who were responsible for building inspection. Right no developers pass the cost of safety inspection off to taxpayers by making the government do the inspections, which leads to bribery and other corruption, something that would not happen in a free market.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Hong Kong Pays For Your Room
Hong Kong is picking up the tab for some of the Hotel costs for trade show visitors, which is another way of cutting prices... starting a biz is getting ever cheaper...
Hong Kong International Printing and Packaging Fair
(27 – 30 April 2009)
Come visit the Fair with our Hotel Sponsorship of up to US$230!
Dear Buyer,
Thank you for registering to visit the 4th edition of Hong Kong International Printing and Packaging Fair 2009. To facilitate the visit of new overseas trade buyers, HKTDC is pleased to sponsor hotel accommodation of up to HKD 1800 (in one of our pre-selected hotels) for one visitor from your company during the fair period.
To enjoy the sponsorship, simply fill in the reply slip and return to us by fax: (852) 3521-3127 or by e-mail matthew.cy.ip@hktdc.org on or before 10th April 2009. For query, please contact Mr Matthew Ip of the HKTDC Head Office at (852) 2240-4306 by fax at (852) 3521-3127 or via email at matthew.cy.ip@hktdc.org.
ENTITLEMENT OF HOTEL SPONSORSHIP
Visit the Fair for 1 day – HKD 1,000
Visit the Fair for 2 days – HKD 1,400 (accumulative total)
Visit the Fair for 3 days – HKD 1,800 (accumulative total)
ACTION NOW!
Step 1: Return the REPLY SLIP to us by fax: (852) 3521-3127 or e-mail matthew.cy.ip@hktdc.org on or before 10 April 2009 (Friday).
Step 2: Upon receiving our ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LETTER with details of the sponsorship entitlements, your preferred hotel will contact you directly to MAKE YOUR BOOKING. If you do not hear from the hotel within a week, please let us know.
Step 3: COLLECT the “HOTEL SPONSORSHIP VOUCHER” IN PERSON during 27 – 30 April 2009 at the AsiaWorld-Expo by presenting the ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LETTER and your name card.
Step 4: PRESENT the “HOTEL SPONSORSHIP VOUCHER” to the hotel cashier when you check out.
RULES AND REGULATIONS
1) Your company MUST be a TRADE BUYER who have not visited the Hong Kong International Printing & Packaging Fair 2008 in order to be entitled for the Hotel Sponsorship Offer.
2) Each company is entitled to ONLY ONE ROOM at ONE HOTEL from 26 – 30 April 2009 (inclusive). This offer is available on a first-come-first-served basis and subject to room availability.
3) If you have applied for the hotel sponsorship programme of the HKTDC Hong Kong Gifts & premium Fair 2009, this application will NOT be processed.
4) If the choice of hotel is fully booked, HKTDC will designate another hotel to the applicant.
5) Applications without credit card details will not be processed. The hotel will levy one-night charge on your credit card if you do not show up on the specified date.
6) You must show up in the Fair and complete a questionnaire when collecting the Hotel Sponsorship Voucher at “Travel Package and Hotel Sponsorship Counter” at the fairground.
7) HKTDC reserves the rights to vary the terms and conditions, change or terminate the sponsorship programme without any prior notice.
8) In case of any dispute over the sponsorship programme, the decision of HKTDC shall be final and binding.
CHOICES OF HOTELS
(Choose ONE hotel by putting a “ΓΌ” in the box provided. Your preferred hotel will contact you directly upon receiving this Reply Slip.)
Hotel
Location
Contact
Room Rates per night (HKD$)
Travelling Time (mins.)
Hotel <–>AWE
o Novotel Citygate Hong Kong #
http://www.novotel-asia.com
51 Man Tung Road, Tung Chung, Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 3602 8888 Fax: (852) 3602 8899
1,500
Taxi – 10
MTR* – 15
o BP International House
www.bpih.com.hk
8 Austin Road, Tsim Sha Tsui, Kowloon, Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 2376 1111
Fax: (852) 2376 1333
1,350
Taxi – 35
MTR* – 45
o City Garden Hotel #
www.citygarden.com.hk
9 City Garden Road, North Point, Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 2887 2888
Fax: (852) 2887 1111
1,100
Taxi – 30
MTR* – 45
o The Empire Hotel Kowloon
http://www.empirehotel.com.hk
62, Kimberley Road, Tsim Sha Tsui, Kowloon, Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 3692 2222
Fax: (852) 3692 2200
1,100
Taxi – 30
MTR* – 45
o South Pacific Hotel
www.southpacifichotel.com.hk
23 Morrison Hill Road, Wan Chai, Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 2572 3838
Fax: (852) 2893 7773
1,050
Taxi – 40
MTR* – 50
o Harbour Plaza North Point #
www.harbour-plaza.com/hpnp
665 King’s Road, North Point, Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 2185 2891
Fax: (852) 2185 2000
990
Taxi – 40
MTR* – 50
o Metropark Hotel Kowloon
www.metroparkhotelkowloon.com
75 Waterloo Road, Kowloon,
Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 2761 1711
Fax: (852) 2761 0769
800
Taxi – 35
MTR* – 45
o Royal View Hotel
http://www.royalview.com.hk
353 Castle Peak Road, Tsuen Wan, Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 3716 2888
Fax: (852) 3716 2999
700
Taxi – 35
MTR* – 45
o L’Hotel Nina et Convention Centre Hong Kong #
http://www.lhotelhk.com
8 Yeung Uk Road, Tsuen Wan, Kowloon, Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 2280 2898
Fax: (852) 2280 2822
700
Taxi – 35
MTR* – 45
o Regal Oriental Hotel
http://regalhotel.com
30-38 Sa Po Road, Kowloon City, Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 2718 0333
Fax: (852) 2718 4111
690
Taxi – 35
MTR* – 50
Hong Kong International Printing & Packaging Fair (27 – 30 April 2009)
REPLY SLIP for HOTEL SPONSORSHIP
(This reply slip is NOT for hotel check-in)
APPLICATION DEADLINE: 10 April 2009 (Friday) Attn: Mr Matthew Ip Fax: (852) 3521-3127
Full Name Mr/Mrs/Ms (as shown on passport): __________________
Company Name: _______
Address: _______
Country: _______
Tel: Fax: Email: _______
Credit Card: o VISA o MC o AE Card No: _________________
Expiry Date: Interested Products: ______
Check-in Date: Check-out Date: __________________
Nature of Business
o Printer
o Publisher / Print Broker
o Machinery Importer
o Packager
o Graphic Arts/ Design House
o Buying Office
o Buying Cooperative
o Importer/ Import Agent
o Distributor
o Greeting Cards Company
o Retailer
o Chain/Department Store
o Ad/ Marketing Agency
o Wholesaler
o Others, pls. specify:_______
I accept the above rules and regulations regarding this hotel sponsorship programme and I understand that should there be disputes over the programme, the decision of HKTDC shall be final and binding.
Signature: Date:
HKTDC
www.hktdc.com
The World's Full Service Trade Promotion Organisation
**********************************************************
This e-mail (including any attachments) is confidential and may contain proprietary information of the Hong Kong Trade Development Council. It may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and then delete the e-mail from your system. Any disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. **********************************************************
What We Read
At a local Austrian economics discussion last Sunday we discussed these two readings...
http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/economic-calculation-in-the-corporate-commonwealth/
http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/hierarchy-or-the-market/
There is a term I like: Free market anti-capitalist. A careful reader might note I have never defended capitalism in my writings, for reasons I'll develop later. Apparently, neither do the powers that be in USA since we switched to fascism last fall. Fascism is managed economy, so I do not like it as a system.
Furniture Business
The Wall Street Journal has an article today about a company that did not take on exceptional debt during the damaging boom times, so it is now seeing its sales increase as the supply capacity drops faster than demand drops.
At one point in the article the owner says his sales people are listening closely to the customers as to what they want next. He gave an example: retailers want samples of various styles of a couch in one couch... that is 4 different leg styles on one couch, 5 different fabric styles, two different arms. Now, that is weird, but it goes to show you'll never know without being in tight contact with your customers. (And is the point to save room as showrooms downsize... they didn't say...)
The Bush administration shifted our economy into the fascist model last fall, and the Obama team is ratifying the change. Few of us will notice because the cost will be born in the future and on the heaviest on the margins. We no longer have the rule of law in USA, but this just means one must change asset allocations.
For my part I am getting out of real estate and gold, and moving expanding my business, and developing an infrastructure that is diffuse and moveable. The key is still customers.
Anyone starting with nothing is well placed right now. Everything is cheap and retailers are eager for new and better. Too much capacity is weighted down and sinking, which is advantageous for the start-up.
Limits to Size of Companies
How do companies get too big to fail? First they get too big. When they are too big, like socialist economies, they have no idea of what things cost internally, so they fail.
NDA means non-disclosure agreement, and NCA means non-compete agreement. These are contracts to keep things secret. I think they are unethical to sign. Are they related to the size of companies?
I'd say inextricably. I was discussing patents on medicine with the CEO of a local biotech, he of course defending patents. I was arguing open source development of meds, and came at him with the idea of independent contractors working on aspects of the process more efficiently than a corporation, and questioned him on what value corporations per se provided. His response was a corporation allowed assets to outlast any actors in the case of a disaster or otherwise traded, etc. I asked what assets in particular, and he said look at the balance sheet. It is a statement of what a corporations owns, property as in plant and equipment, and such things as "goodwill" and intellectual "property."
Well. Aside from the weird idea that a legal fiction, a corporation, can own real property, we can pretty much assume the real property was acquired through monopoly profits given the patents and trade secrets. (As for "goodwill" since I believe trade marks are not legit, goodwill would rather go out the window if everyone could be "Google" tomorrow.)
What do NDAs and NCAs have to do with IPR? In our present regime, if everyone in the process of developing intellectual "property" felt free to discuss openly any direction a given company was taking at any point, and how far along they were, then not much would make it to the level of intellectual "property" as defined by the regime. The system would rather fall apart, but there would be an incessant rush to be first with the best. NDAs and NCAs are critical to maintaining the regime. Likewise, without NDAs and NCAs corporations could not aggregate exceptional wealth without monopoly profits.
In our regime we get really cool shiny things. But sickle cell anemia goes unaddressed, and HRT is sold for 35 years before someone bothers to measure the effect. We have a one size fits all economy and exceptional wealth strictly limited. In a free market we would have literally innumerable options but no exceptional wealth.
It would be fascinating to see what the balance sheets of a few leading companies would look like with IPR and goodwill deleted.
I think it is unethical to sign NCAs because knowledge is not a category of property. You ought to be available to serve anyone who will meet your price.
I think it is unethical to sign NDAs because knowledge is not a category of property. You ought to be able to sell what you know to anyone who will meet your price.
In both instances, it is never true you are the only one who knows something valuable (obviously he who requested you sign the agreement, and anyone else working in the area). Customers will decide what you are worth when they check around on the price from others of what you offer. The fact that you are "for sale" will cause the info holder to lower his price instantly since he cannot depend on exclusivity any longer. It becomes a race to the bottom. The customer rules again. All is well in the universe.
So I'd say NDA and NCA and size of corporation are inextricably linked.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)