Outfoxed
Jarvis has a
very thought-provoking response to my recent research note. Highly recommended.
I won't press my argument, because I think Jeff's response is killer - I'll just make three quick points:
1) I don't see Fox as an owner; I see them as the enabler. I think the real owners of edge plays are connected consumers (of course).
2) The bigger point I wanted to make was that it's not technology, but the social and cultural that counts. And being social/cultural is vastly different in, say, cosmetics, than it is in sports. So I think generic infrastructure plays are the wrong approach.
3) I'm definitely not in love with Fox - in fact, I'm planning on doing a post on what's wrong their investment strategy soon. But I think they are the guys getting real results (if you follow the evolution of business model innovation in this space, you know what I'm talking about), because they understand attention econ.
Umair:
1. Ah, but they DO own the space.
2. We absolutely agree that the social/cultural matters but I do think some infrastructure can cut across (e.g., browsers, media players, ad structure)... but not all.
3. We agree.
