If you look at network theory, I think the thousand fans KK is referring to are what are known as Hubs or Connectors. This is the ideal base because they are influencers with their own growing networks that they spread their interests out to. Rather than suggesting that a True Fan is a person who spends $100 on their object of fandom, think about them as people who will generate that $100 through their influence on others.
I almost totally disagree with Scalzi's post not because he is wrong, but because he is too centric to genre fandom and he ignores the fact that KK is talking averages. If I buy 20 radiohead songs and attend two concerts in a year I probably spend $300. You only need 330 of me to have your 1000 fans. But consider this: I'm not going to those concerts alone and my friends are going to be 'forced' to listen to some my musical preferences...and some will convert.
This is not new. I was in a band, pre-Internet, and we built a loyal fan following, in our town, of over 500 fans who bought music, attended shows and brought friends. This was accomplished with posters, PR and word of mouth. If you can't find 1000 true fans with the tools we have today you might want to question your product.
Of course iPhone is a computer- anything with a chip in it is a computer. But it is not an untethered computer.
As far as the Microsoft example, take a look at the market cap, cash on hand, profit margins and stock appreciation even with the recent plunge and tell me Apple is not gaining on MS. Vista is a disaster, Apple has doubled its share of the PC market in the last year and is projected to be at 10% or more by the end of this year. It is larger than Dell and far more profitable (market cap).
This post is just plain off base, IMHO. Good linkbait tho...
I have a question? Do you understand that Apple is a business? A business that has the right and obligation to its shareholders to offer products they can earn a profit on without imperiling the quality or security of those products?
Their development of a controlled ecosystem for iPhone developers is fair and understandable. These devices are not computers, they are phones that work within a network. Allowing unfettered access and uncontrolled distribution of applications for this system would be stupid from a business POV.
In addition, unlike open initiatives, this one has a major built-in incentive for developing great applications: easy distribution at no cost, great revenue share and $100 million in VC money. We're going to see hundreds of start-ups emerge because they set up a system that is not for amateurs and crooks.
You have to be extremely careful. We wanted to acquire investors for a portfolio of domains we own and were informed by our attorney that this could be viewed as a securities transaction even though domains are IP, not shares in a business.
The problem is the scam factor- stock and securities scams are the drivers behind these regs. The SEC is protecting unsophisticated investors from rip-offs. Also it is your responsibility, as a company seeking capital, to determine that the people you make an offering to are 'Acredited Investors' ($2mm in liquid assets or $250k annual income for at least 3 years). There's no way you could do this in P2P exchange.
That being said, Sar-Box is an insane burden for smaller companies.
One major factor is how dependent these companies are on debt to manage their business. Because it is cyclical, they do depend on debt in many cases to give them the ability to shift to emerging technologies rapidly. And as we've seen in the markets, the ability to easily borrow large sums has practically vanished overnight.
Paradoxically this is not the case for companies like Apple or Cisco who don't actually build their products from scratch- they are primarily design and marketing companies who sub out manufacture to others. That's why they sit on piles of cash and are not dependent on borrowing.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Martin Edic.
If you look at network theory, I think the thousand fans KK is referring to are what are known as Hubs or Connectors. This is the ideal base because they are influencers with their own growing networks that they spread their interests out to. Rather than suggesting that a True Fan is a person who spends $100 on their object of fandom, think about them as people who will generate that $100 through their influence on others.
I almost totally disagree with Scalzi's post not because he is wrong, but because he is too centric to genre fandom and he ignores the fact that KK is talking averages. If I buy 20 radiohead songs and attend two concerts in a year I probably spend $300. You only need 330 of me to have your 1000 fans. But consider this: I'm not going to those concerts alone and my friends are going to be 'forced' to listen to some my musical preferences...and some will convert.
This is not new. I was in a band, pre-Internet, and we built a loyal fan following, in our town, of over 500 fans who bought music, attended shows and brought friends. This was accomplished with posters, PR and word of mouth. If you can't find 1000 true fans with the tools we have today you might want to question your product.
I know it's a computer d'oh!
Of course iPhone is a computer- anything with a chip in it is a computer. But it is not an untethered computer.
As far as the Microsoft example, take a look at the market cap, cash on hand, profit margins and stock appreciation even with the recent plunge and tell me Apple is not gaining on MS. Vista is a disaster, Apple has doubled its share of the PC market in the last year and is projected to be at 10% or more by the end of this year. It is larger than Dell and far more profitable (market cap).
This post is just plain off base, IMHO. Good linkbait tho...
iPhone SDK
I have a question? Do you understand that Apple is a business? A business that has the right and obligation to its shareholders to offer products they can earn a profit on without imperiling the quality or security of those products?
Their development of a controlled ecosystem for iPhone developers is fair and understandable. These devices are not computers, they are phones that work within a network. Allowing unfettered access and uncontrolled distribution of applications for this system would be stupid from a business POV.
In addition, unlike open initiatives, this one has a major built-in incentive for developing great applications: easy distribution at no cost, great revenue share and $100 million in VC money. We're going to see hundreds of start-ups emerge because they set up a system that is not for amateurs and crooks.
This suit is nothing more than PR linkbait. I'd like to see Techdirt do some pieces on how people are using IP laws to promote themselves...
SEC casts a wide net
You have to be extremely careful. We wanted to acquire investors for a portfolio of domains we own and were informed by our attorney that this could be viewed as a securities transaction even though domains are IP, not shares in a business.
The problem is the scam factor- stock and securities scams are the drivers behind these regs. The SEC is protecting unsophisticated investors from rip-offs. Also it is your responsibility, as a company seeking capital, to determine that the people you make an offering to are 'Acredited Investors' ($2mm in liquid assets or $250k annual income for at least 3 years). There's no way you could do this in P2P exchange.
That being said, Sar-Box is an insane burden for smaller companies.
Chip Price Fluctuation
One major factor is how dependent these companies are on debt to manage their business. Because it is cyclical, they do depend on debt in many cases to give them the ability to shift to emerging technologies rapidly. And as we've seen in the markets, the ability to easily borrow large sums has practically vanished overnight.
Paradoxically this is not the case for companies like Apple or Cisco who don't actually build their products from scratch- they are primarily design and marketing companies who sub out manufacture to others. That's why they sit on piles of cash and are not dependent on borrowing.