Alex
12-12-2009, 08:56 PM
Can Onlive leverage alternative (new) measures of success?
Sometimes companies are held hostage by their investors and aren’t able to do what seems to be in their best interest or even able to do what seems to be the right thing. Does a company like OnLive get more latitude with how things are characterized? Do they get more room for long term bets?
Measuring the success of an internet company (cloud company if you like- they may well be different) has always been challenging. People hold their breath until an Amazon pays off, its like some sort of act of faith especially when it allows people to routinely get rich off of converting 4 billion dollar industries into 4 million dollar industries. It simply feels counter intuitive and risky so better measures are not a new topic but a long sought after goal.
The head of Metro PCS has said he is going to use LTE and GSM4 to bring unlimited voice to cell phones for $5 dollars a month and that there is nothing that the Telcos can do about it and he feels confident he can do this from his 3% market share position. He uses novel measures already in his business- stuff that roughly involves bandwidth to spatial volume etc.
I think its beginning to be understood that we need new measures and to not only survive but to thrive. These new measures do involve accountability and transparency but they go beyond accounting reforms. They are radically different and constitute a new language. We need a bridge to translate our current efforts so that we have a starting point. We need more than Government ideals. Governments can talk about a GHI (gross happiness index) but how do we bring that down to the level of the individual entity and make it count with investors and banks? We can vote with our dollars but how do we do we bring more awareness to the process?
If we talk about ecological efficiency per unit of happiness what are we saying in current terms?
Does ecology represent long term investment but short term credit through reduced regulatory pressure? Can this be leveraged into solid customer good will?
Is happiness actual customer goodwill and market success?
What is the priority under such a measuring system?
1. Earth ( put the market first- don’t over fish or let your competitors get away with it.)
2. Customer (market success, support and momentum)
3. Investor (security-peace of mind- trust- investor good will)
4. Competitor ( greatest liability and greatest asset- they benefit from this structure)
Go local
Go zero waste supply chain and manufacturing.
Go green
Go with customer relationship even if you are a commodity producer
Do great customer feed back even if discounts are needed to encourage the habit.
Avoid dividends.
Can Onlive apply the GHI to itself and create a competitive basis where it gets credit for doing so? The average business is producing 13 trucks of waste per product. Its throwing away profit. To me a company like OnLive should generate an early Amazon level of credit and intrigue just by going after it.
Not just “do no evil-“ but are we truly good for the customer (all of them even competitors) or are just using each other out of mere necessity? Is this the good life or just the random life? Are we really doing the best we can with what we have or can have? Is this fulfillment?
Sometimes companies are held hostage by their investors and aren’t able to do what seems to be in their best interest or even able to do what seems to be the right thing. Does a company like OnLive get more latitude with how things are characterized? Do they get more room for long term bets?
Measuring the success of an internet company (cloud company if you like- they may well be different) has always been challenging. People hold their breath until an Amazon pays off, its like some sort of act of faith especially when it allows people to routinely get rich off of converting 4 billion dollar industries into 4 million dollar industries. It simply feels counter intuitive and risky so better measures are not a new topic but a long sought after goal.
The head of Metro PCS has said he is going to use LTE and GSM4 to bring unlimited voice to cell phones for $5 dollars a month and that there is nothing that the Telcos can do about it and he feels confident he can do this from his 3% market share position. He uses novel measures already in his business- stuff that roughly involves bandwidth to spatial volume etc.
I think its beginning to be understood that we need new measures and to not only survive but to thrive. These new measures do involve accountability and transparency but they go beyond accounting reforms. They are radically different and constitute a new language. We need a bridge to translate our current efforts so that we have a starting point. We need more than Government ideals. Governments can talk about a GHI (gross happiness index) but how do we bring that down to the level of the individual entity and make it count with investors and banks? We can vote with our dollars but how do we do we bring more awareness to the process?
If we talk about ecological efficiency per unit of happiness what are we saying in current terms?
Does ecology represent long term investment but short term credit through reduced regulatory pressure? Can this be leveraged into solid customer good will?
Is happiness actual customer goodwill and market success?
What is the priority under such a measuring system?
1. Earth ( put the market first- don’t over fish or let your competitors get away with it.)
2. Customer (market success, support and momentum)
3. Investor (security-peace of mind- trust- investor good will)
4. Competitor ( greatest liability and greatest asset- they benefit from this structure)
Go local
Go zero waste supply chain and manufacturing.
Go green
Go with customer relationship even if you are a commodity producer
Do great customer feed back even if discounts are needed to encourage the habit.
Avoid dividends.
Can Onlive apply the GHI to itself and create a competitive basis where it gets credit for doing so? The average business is producing 13 trucks of waste per product. Its throwing away profit. To me a company like OnLive should generate an early Amazon level of credit and intrigue just by going after it.
Not just “do no evil-“ but are we truly good for the customer (all of them even competitors) or are just using each other out of mere necessity? Is this the good life or just the random life? Are we really doing the best we can with what we have or can have? Is this fulfillment?