Social Capital (Silicon Valley VC firm) recently published an interesting series on (economic) bubbles: what they are, how they form, when they are useful, and so on. It’s worth a read – you can start here.
Here’s a taste:
“Prices in markets turn out to have two roles: they tell us something about the past, and they influence our actions — and therefore, their own price — in the future. Sometimes, in a big way, this dual role makes a particular asset class — tulip bulbs, railway stock, Canadian real estate, a digital token — become attractive solely because its price is going up. George Soros characterized and mastered this phenomenon, known as Reflexivity: when our views and our actions reinforce each other. If an expensive price means that something is high quality or otherwise attractive, we will tend to buy more of it and drive the price higher, independently of whether or not the thing is any good. It’s true for sunglasses, it’s true for ICOs, and a whole lot more.”
For obvious reasons I couldn’t resist posting this quote. Notwithstanding the shot at Canadian real estate, bubbles are a fascinating topic. They happen time and time again because we are greedy.
Social Capital (Silicon Valley VC firm) recently published an interesting series on (economic) bubbles: what they are, how they form, when they are useful, and so on. It’s worth a read – you can start here.
Here’s a taste:
“Prices in markets turn out to have two roles: they tell us something about the past, and they influence our actions — and therefore, their own price — in the future. Sometimes, in a big way, this dual role makes a particular asset class — tulip bulbs, railway stock, Canadian real estate, a digital token — become attractive solely because its price is going up. George Soros characterized and mastered this phenomenon, known as Reflexivity: when our views and our actions reinforce each other. If an expensive price means that something is high quality or otherwise attractive, we will tend to buy more of it and drive the price higher, independently of whether or not the thing is any good. It’s true for sunglasses, it’s true for ICOs, and a whole lot more.”
For obvious reasons I couldn’t resist posting this quote. Notwithstanding the shot at Canadian real estate, bubbles are a fascinating topic. They happen time and time again because we are greedy.
Fred Wilson has a great post up on his blog today about open protocols. By open protocols he is referring to things like TCP/IP (transmission control protocol and internet protocol), HTTP (hypertext transfer protocol), and SMTP (simple mail transfer protocol). Whether you realize it or not, you rely on these protocols every single day if you go on the internet, browse the web, and write emails.
If you’re interested in these sorts of nerdy things, I recommend you read his post. I’m not going to write about open protocols today – though I do find them fascinating. Instead, I would like to talk about the last paragraph of his post.
Here it is:
“I believe that business model innovation is more disruptive that technological innovation. Incumbents can adapt to and adopt new technological changes (web to mobile) way easier than they can adapt to and adopt new business models (selling software to free ad-supported software). So this new protocol-based business model feels like one of these “changes of venue” as my partner Brad likes to call them. And that smells like a big investable macro trend to me.”
This is interesting to me for 2 reasons.
First, business model innovation is incredibly powerful. Once a company has built itself up around an existing model, it can be painfully difficult to change. Imagine you have a 200 person sales team that would become unnecessary should you pivot your business model. Are you going to fire them and make the switch?
This is also one of the reasons why some tech companies can exist for so long before they make any money. Sometimes – but not always – it’s because the investors believe that if the company has users, attention or whatever it may be, that they will figure out a way to monetize them/it. And maybe, just maybe, it’ll be a business model that no one has ever thought of before.
Second, look how he is publicly sharing his investment thesis. Why would he do that? Shouldn’t he just go off and do it and not tell anyone? Clearly, he too believes that there’s greater value in being open and transparent.
Fred Wilson has a great post up on his blog today about open protocols. By open protocols he is referring to things like TCP/IP (transmission control protocol and internet protocol), HTTP (hypertext transfer protocol), and SMTP (simple mail transfer protocol). Whether you realize it or not, you rely on these protocols every single day if you go on the internet, browse the web, and write emails.
If you’re interested in these sorts of nerdy things, I recommend you read his post. I’m not going to write about open protocols today – though I do find them fascinating. Instead, I would like to talk about the last paragraph of his post.
Here it is:
“I believe that business model innovation is more disruptive that technological innovation. Incumbents can adapt to and adopt new technological changes (web to mobile) way easier than they can adapt to and adopt new business models (selling software to free ad-supported software). So this new protocol-based business model feels like one of these “changes of venue” as my partner Brad likes to call them. And that smells like a big investable macro trend to me.”
This is interesting to me for 2 reasons.
First, business model innovation is incredibly powerful. Once a company has built itself up around an existing model, it can be painfully difficult to change. Imagine you have a 200 person sales team that would become unnecessary should you pivot your business model. Are you going to fire them and make the switch?
This is also one of the reasons why some tech companies can exist for so long before they make any money. Sometimes – but not always – it’s because the investors believe that if the company has users, attention or whatever it may be, that they will figure out a way to monetize them/it. And maybe, just maybe, it’ll be a business model that no one has ever thought of before.
Second, look how he is publicly sharing his investment thesis. Why would he do that? Shouldn’t he just go off and do it and not tell anyone? Clearly, he too believes that there’s greater value in being open and transparent.
There are 26 cantons in Switzerland. One of the smaller cantons is Zug. It has a population of around 122,000 people and an area of 239 square kilometers. The capital of the canton is the town of Zug, which itself has a population of about 29,256 (as of December 2015) and an area of 21.61 square kilometers.
To help put that into perspective, a single municipal ward in downtown Toronto (Ward 28 - Toronto Centre-Rosedale) had a population of over 66,000 people back in 2011.
But as small as Zug may be, it is known as one of the most business friendly jurisdictions in the world. It has some of the lowest corporate taxes and the local revenue service prides itself on calling each taxpayer a “client” as opposed to a “debtor.”
As of 2010, the canton’s registry listed more than 29,000 companies, with more than 1,000 arriving and being started each year. There are about as many companies in the canton as there are people in the town of Zug.
It’s a classic example of jurisdictional arbitrage and it’s one that Zug seems determined to keep. In July 2016, the town of Zug began accepting digital currencies, such as Bitcoin, as payment for city fees.
The impetus for doing so was to help advance Zug’s position as a global center for cryptocurrency innovation. There’s a very real government supported push to make Zug into “Crypto Valley.” And startups from around the world who are working in this space are starting to take notice. To me this feels like a natural extension given the canton’s existing strengths and reputation. (More reading here and here.)
I’ve been to Zug maybe twice and, at first blush, it could easily pass for your average sleepy-yet-affluent Swiss town. But then you think about all of the money that flows through this place and you quickly understand why that modest, but very tasty, breakfast sandwich just cost you all of the CHF’s in your wallet.
Of course, if the entrepreneurs in Zug get their way, we won’t be carrying around wallets anymore. We’ll be paying with some sort of crypto varietal. And that would only strengthen this canton’s story: You don’t necessarily need to be big to be globally impactful – just put the right policies in the place.
Oh, and have a very high quality of life and an immensely beautiful natural setting. Those things help as well.
Photo by Martin Sattler on Unsplash. The above photo is actually of Morschach in Switzerland, not of Zug. I couldn’t find a royalty free image of the latter. Please forgive me for the false advertising.
There are 26 cantons in Switzerland. One of the smaller cantons is Zug. It has a population of around 122,000 people and an area of 239 square kilometers. The capital of the canton is the town of Zug, which itself has a population of about 29,256 (as of December 2015) and an area of 21.61 square kilometers.
To help put that into perspective, a single municipal ward in downtown Toronto (Ward 28 - Toronto Centre-Rosedale) had a population of over 66,000 people back in 2011.
But as small as Zug may be, it is known as one of the most business friendly jurisdictions in the world. It has some of the lowest corporate taxes and the local revenue service prides itself on calling each taxpayer a “client” as opposed to a “debtor.”
As of 2010, the canton’s registry listed more than 29,000 companies, with more than 1,000 arriving and being started each year. There are about as many companies in the canton as there are people in the town of Zug.
It’s a classic example of jurisdictional arbitrage and it’s one that Zug seems determined to keep. In July 2016, the town of Zug began accepting digital currencies, such as Bitcoin, as payment for city fees.
The impetus for doing so was to help advance Zug’s position as a global center for cryptocurrency innovation. There’s a very real government supported push to make Zug into “Crypto Valley.” And startups from around the world who are working in this space are starting to take notice. To me this feels like a natural extension given the canton’s existing strengths and reputation. (More reading here and here.)
I’ve been to Zug maybe twice and, at first blush, it could easily pass for your average sleepy-yet-affluent Swiss town. But then you think about all of the money that flows through this place and you quickly understand why that modest, but very tasty, breakfast sandwich just cost you all of the CHF’s in your wallet.
Of course, if the entrepreneurs in Zug get their way, we won’t be carrying around wallets anymore. We’ll be paying with some sort of crypto varietal. And that would only strengthen this canton’s story: You don’t necessarily need to be big to be globally impactful – just put the right policies in the place.
Oh, and have a very high quality of life and an immensely beautiful natural setting. Those things help as well.
Photo by Martin Sattler on Unsplash. The above photo is actually of Morschach in Switzerland, not of Zug. I couldn’t find a royalty free image of the latter. Please forgive me for the false advertising.
