Brandon Donnelly

Daily insights for city builders, delivered every morning at 6 AM ET. I’m Brandon Donnelly — a Toronto-based real estate developer and founder of Globizen. I’ve been writing here since 2013.

Subscribe

Tag: tech

  • Delivering happiness

    I was both surprised and saddened to learn about the death of Tony Hsieh this weekend. Forty-six years old is far too young.

    Though best known as a pioneer of e-commerce (he was previously CEO of Zappos) and for his brilliant/wacky management ideas, Tony was also a city builder, particularly in Las Vegas.

    Here’s an excerpt from a recent WSJ article:

    In Las Vegas, Mr. Hsieh became beloved locally for investing $350 million into revitalizing part of the city’s downtown including real estate, restaurants, retail and a tech startup fund starting in 2012. His vision included the development Container Park, a quirky shopping and entertainment center where retailers operate in converted shipping containers. Visitors are greeted by a giant sculpture of a praying mantis that shoots fire.

    But perhaps more importantly, everything I have read this weekend about Tony describes him as a good human being with a great sense of humor and a commitment to “delivering happiness.”

    Here’s another excerpt from the same article:

    After Zappos had a rash of late deliveries, he sent an apology note to customers and provided a phone number for use by anyone who suffered “undue hardship.” As for those who were merely annoyed, he said, they were welcome to call Zappos and “ask whoever answers the phone to do something weird and embarrassing, like sing ‘I’m a Little Teacup.’”

    Happiness. I can’t think of anything better to be delivering to people in the world right now.

  • The value of boredom

    I took a class during my undergraduate degree about the material culture of the Victorian era. I took it mostly for fun and because I found the lessons relevant to architecture. But it also allowed me to write papers about things like gin (though I remember not doing very well on that one).

    My big takeaway from that class, which continues to stick with me to this day, is about how difficult it was for the Victorians to process and ultimately accept new technologies and ideas. There seemed to be immense skepticism and concern for everything that was novel.

    Take, for example, the first ever escalator. An invention of the Victorian era, there were very serious concerns at the time about what such rapid changes in elevation would do to the human body. That’s why they initially gave people booze at the top of the ride. A little something to calm the nerves after such a traumatic experience.

    This, of course, seems silly today. But I always come back to it when I see us trying to process new technologies. Will posterity eventually think that we too were being silly for worrying? Will they think it’s cute that we thought social media was turning us all into narcissistic and envious creatures? Probably.

    Still, there’s no denying that material culture impacts us all. I was reminded of this while reading this WIRED article by Craig Mod called, “The Glorious, Almost-Disconnected Boredom of My Walk in Japan.” (Tim Ferriss shared it in his most recent newsletter.)

    Craig does ultra-marathon walks. And the article is about one that he did in Japan. While this may seem like a recipe for a whole lot of nothing, there are things to be learned here. In it, he talks about how he rationed his use of technology on these walks and how “boredom” became something of value.

    In the context of a walk like this, “boredom” is a goal, the antipode of mindless connectivity, constant stimulation, anger and dissatisfaction. I put “boredom” in quotes because the boredom I’m talking about fosters a heightened sense of presence. To be “bored” is to be free of distraction.

    Perhaps the biggest drawback of our phones is that they allow us to fill every second of boredom with stuff. Have 3 three seconds to spare? Pull out the phone. On the one hand it’s nice to never be bored. But on the other hand, it’s harder to be contemplative. It’s harder to go deep into things. And it’s harder to find that right kind of “bored.”

    Or maybe we’re just being fuddy-duddies who will one day be made fun of by future generations when somebody decides to teach a university course about early 21st century material culture.

  • Billionaire wealth in China grew by 1146% over the last decade

    UBS and PwC’s recent report on billionaire wealth highlights some interesting trends about the global economy and global wealth.

    • Billionaire wealth in mainland China is now second to only the United States, having grown by about 1146% from 2009 to 2020, compared to 170% in the US. As of the middle of this year, it was sitting at about USD 1.7 trillion in China, compared to USD 3.6 trillion in the US.
    • Hong Kong remains a force with only 1,105 square kilometers of land (not all of which is developable). Billionaire wealth grew by about 208% to USD 356 billion over the same time period as above. That puts it ahead of the United Kingdom, Canada, and Brazil in total dollars.
    • About half of all billionaires seem to have a significant amount of their wealth invested in real estate. Somewhere between 21-40% of their net worth.
    • At the same time, the report identifies the real estate industry as having the fewest number of “innovators & disruptors.” Only 17% of billionaires (whose wealth is primarily derived from real estate) are classified in this way. The report calls out the sector as being “especially slow to embrace technology to boost efficiency.”
    • Perhaps the most interesting takeaway is that, even within the rarified billionaire community, tech is driving polarization. For most of the last decade, the sector didn’t matter all that much. The rich were getting richer. Now it’s more so the tech rich. And COVID-19 seems to be accelerating this trend.

    This is not to say that I think people are particularly worried about billionaires who maybe aren’t getting as rich as they used to. That’s like complaining about being too good looking. But it is clear that tech is driving a bunch of macro shifts in the global economy and this is just another example of that playing out.

    Image: UBS and PwC

  • The internet is no longer American

    This is the topic of Benedict Evan’s latest blog post, which is all about the internet, regulation, and the rise of China, as well as other countries. The internet is now deeply ingrained in everyday life. As of 2017, about 40% of Americans had met their partners online. We do everything online. But 80-90% of the world’s internet users are now outside of the US. There are more smartphone users in China than in the US and western Europe combined. And venture capital dollars have started to diversify away from just the US (see above chart). All of this — but mostly Tiktok — has Americans questioning how best to handle and how best to regulate.

    Here’s an excerpt from Benedict’s post:

    Both of these are captured in Tiktok. This is the first time that Americans have really had to deal with their teenagers using a form of mass media that isn’t created in their country by people who mostly share their values. It’s from somewhere else. That’s compounded by the fact that the ‘somewhere else’ is China, with all of the political and geopolitical issues that come with that, but I’d suggest that the core, structural issue is that it’s foreign. This is, of course, a problem that the rest of the world has been wrestling with since 1994, but it comes as something of a shock in Washington DC. There’s an old joke that war is how God teaches Americans geography – now it’s regulation.

    For the full post, click here.

    Image/facts: Benedict Evans

  • Tech and New York City

    Tech:NYC has just launched a new podcast called Talk:NYC. The first episode is with venture capitalist and blogger Fred Wilson. (Though, it should be noted that Fred and his wife, Joanne, are also involved in the real estate development space.) In this episode, Julie Samuels and Fred Wilson talk about why he came to New York, how to manage through a downturn, where working spaces are going, and why the magic of New York is still there — among a bunch of other things. Click here if you can’t see the embedded podcast below.

    https://soundcloud.com/user-212806065/talknycep01fredwilson

  • Revolutionizing the online buying and selling of consumer real estate

    This week it was announced that Social Capital Hedosophia II — a special purpose acquisition company associated with Chamath Palihapitiya — will merge with the real estate startup Opendoor, effectively taking the company public. Without going into all of the details, SPACs are kind of popular right now. They’re a way to take companies public without going through the traditional IPO process. And Chamath is clearly a believer in the approach, as he has gone ahead and reserved all of the symbols from “IPOA” to “IPOZ” on the New York Stock Exchange. $IPOB is what will be merging with Opendoor.

    But SPACs are not the point of this post. The point is that I have written a lot about Opendoor over the years on this blog. (Here are those post.) And I’m pretty sure that, on a number of occasions, I have referred to it as one of if not the most promising consumer-facing real estate startup. So in my view this announcement is a pretty big deal for both the company and for the industry. As Chamath puts it in the below investment thesis, “real estate is the largest, undisrupted form of buying/selling in the US worth more than $1.6 trillion annually.” And it’s only a matter of time before that process moves online.

  • Twelve climate technologies

    This is an excellent blog post by entrepreneur and venture capitalist Vinod Khosla about some of the “instigators” that are working to help solve our climate crisis and some of the areas in which we probably should be focusing on next. One of the things that’s noteworthy about the post is that he distills it all down into 12 areas of focus that — if solved and if scaled — could have a material impact on carbon emissions. They are (verbatim):

    1. Electric vehicles & automotive batteries
    2. Food & agriculture, especially meat
    3. Low carbon transportation: Air transportation (jet fuel), shipping (electrofuels, biofuels?)
    4. Cement or substitute construction material
    5. Low carbon dispatchable electricity generation (fusion, geothermal, nuclear)
    6. Public transit
    7. Grid storage (long duration battery storage)
    8. HVAC
    9. Industrial processes (hydrogen?)
    10. Fertilizer (hydrogen)
    11. Water
    12. Steel

    Looking at this list, it is clear that some of these things are already happening (and some aren’t). I currently own an ICE vehicle, but I’m fairly certain it will be the last non-electric vehicle I ever own. It’s also not clear whether I will want to continue owning a car. Dynamic mass transit and overall autonomy are things that we’ve talked a lot about on this blog.

    But here’s the other idea put forward in Khosla’s post. If these are in fact the 12 most impactful and important categories, then we may only be 12 or so companies away from real solutions. We only be 12 or so entrepreneurs away from meaningful societal change. When you look at it this way, the climate crisis should hopefully feel a lot less daunting.

  • The new normal, whatever that is

    Back in February, I shared a presentation by Benedict Evans about the macro and strategic trends that have been playing out in the tech industry. (Of course, the potential impacts go well beyond tech.) Well that was February and lot has happened since then. So he has updated a bunch of his slides and it is now called, “Tech and the new normal.” We know that things have changed, but we don’t know what things will really look like when this is all over — and which changes will have durability. Benedict doesn’t necessarily prognosticate in his presentation, but he does provide valuable historical context and some great data. So there are a lot of conclusions that you might be able to draw from it on your own. It’s also my kind of slide deck. Not a lot of text. Lots of graphics/diagrams. And really only one key takeaway per slide. Here you are.

  • Zoomed out

    Joining a Zoom (or other video) meeting is as frictionless as opening up the calendar invite and clicking the link. No need to login or do much else, except maybe fiddle with the audio for a bit. “Can you hear me now?” The benefits to this are obvious. But if you’re Zoom (or another video conferencing company) there could be a slight problem: I don’t really care where that link is taking me, as long as it’s taking me to the meeting I was supposed to join 4 minutes ago. In other words, there aren’t really any network effects. The service doesn’t get any better for me as more people use it, because anybody can join the link that I send them. Benedict Evans recently made this argument, here, and he goes on to posit that video calls, like voice calls, are destined to become a commodity. All that will matter is how you package them up. Makes sense.

  • Exposure tracing APIs to be released May 1

    The “contact tracing” API that Apple and Google are working on and that I wrote about earlier this month is set to be released on May 1. Given all the concerns around privacy, it’s now being referred to as “exposure tracing.” The idea, here, is to emphasize that it is being designed to trace the coronavirus and not individuals.

    To be clear, we’re talking about APIs, and so third party apps will need to be built on top of this tech before we can start downloading anything to our phones. But I am sure that will happen very soon and I will gladly opt in.

    It’s also worth mentioning that this entire concept of smartphone exposure tracing only works when Apple and Google cooperate. Whatever apps ultimately get built need to work across both platforms, otherwise there would be far too many gaps in the network. So this — along with the focus on privacy — has become a bit of good PR for “big tech.”

    The smart people working on exposure tracing over at Oxford University seem to think that (alongside other interventions) we could stop this virus with only about 60% of the population using an exposure tracing app. (They ran models with a pretend city of 1 million people.) But even at 50% penetration, they believe it could make a meaningful contribution.

    These are numbers I think we could easily get to in major cities. Overall, I suspect it could also make people feel a lot more comfortable about going out. And going out is what’s going to be required as we gradually reopen the global economy. How many of you think you will opt in to something like this once it becomes available?