3 ms·

Any links you could recommend? I’d like to read more as I disagree strongly.

losteric 9y ago
* Peter Thiel's WSJ article: https://www.wsj.com/articles/peter-thiel-competition-is-for-losers-1410535536 https://www.wsj.com/articles/peter-thiel-competition-is-for-... * Criticism: https://medium.com/@petersimsie/why-peter-thiel-is-dead-wrong-about-monopolies-390d316180bd https://medium.com/@petersimsie/why-peter-thiel-is-dead-wron... * Alternate interpretation of Thiel's intent: https://www.quora.com/Peter-Thiel-claims-that-competition-is-for-losers-and-that-monopolies-are-the-way-to-go-Does-this-mean-that-I-should-stop-with-my-start-up-idea https://www.quora.com/Peter-Thiel-claims-that-competition-is...
- emodendroket 9y ago
  I mean, in the narrow sense he's of course right -- if you're a business owner or investor the logical thing to do is to aim to create a monopoly. Where I depart is the claim that this is also good for society as a whole.
  - losteric 9y ago
    I agree - didn't feel it was worth mentioning considering the original and the criticism I linked to :) I like drawing parallels between economics and ecology... monopolies are farms, massive artificial monocultures that suppress natural competition and extract value for the profit of a few. They embody a cycle of growth and stagnation. A healthy economy is more like a jungle, innumerable smaller competitors with diverse approaches to survival... an extremely resilient and constantly evolving ecosystem that leads to fascinating innovation.
    - jasode 9y ago
      >A healthy economy is more like a jungle, innumerable smaller competitors ... that leads to fascinating innovation. I think you missed PT's point. The word "monopoly" has overshadowed his message. He wants people to pursue "blue ocean"[1] ideas to be innovative. Instead of starting a company that makes another generic clone of aspirin, you pursue a drug that cures breast cancer. Or instead of building a business that broadcasts 150 characters (hey we offer you +10 more characters than Twitter), do something more innovative for society like building cheap flying cars. I'd venture to guess that 99% actually agree with PT's underlying idea (innovation) but the distasteful word "monopoly" has completely drowned out the message. The term "blue ocean" is the same concept -- it just doesn't rile people up as much. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Ocean_Strategy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Ocean_Strategy
      - emodendroket 9y ago
        Does the typical investor really care if the idea is a cure for breast cancer or "driving all existing providers in some space out of business and then mopping up the market"?
        jasode 9y ago
        Yes, investors care about the goals of the business. See the promises of Theranos' "40 tests and detect cancer from a single drop of blood". I can't think of a VC that has the investment thesis of "put money into businesses that has cutthroat competition and drive others out of business". Theranos had promises of "blue ocean". No competition. This attracted investors like moths to a flame. (We now know they had no competitors because their technology was a fraud.) The investors would have been better off investing in a boring factory making generic aspirin ("red oceans of bloody competition").
        emodendroket 9y ago
        I'd argue that's basically what Uber is trying to do.
        jasode 9y ago
        Fyi... Peter Thiel thinks Uber is overvalued. He didn't like the way they compete. Uber should be a case study that burning up billions in investor money (billions wasted on trying to underprice Didi in China) was a colossal mistake. How much of that bad strategy is blamed on Travis's vs investors is something we won't know until a tell-all book comes out.
        emodendroket 9y ago
        I think they're likely overvalued too, but it seems to be an obvious counterexample of the claims about investor behavior regardless.
      - losteric 9y ago

* Peter Thiel's WSJ article: https://www.wsj.com/articles/peter-thiel-competition-is-for-losers-1410535536 https://www.wsj.com/articles/peter-thiel-competition-is-for-... * Criticism: https://medium.com/@petersimsie/why-peter-thiel-is-dead-wrong-about-monopolies-390d316180bd https://medium.com/@petersimsie/why-peter-thiel-is-dead-wron... * Alternate interpretation of Thiel's intent: https://www.quora.com/Peter-Thiel-claims-that-competition-is-for-losers-and-that-monopolies-are-the-way-to-go-Does-this-mean-that-I-should-stop-with-my-start-up-idea https://www.quora.com/Peter-Thiel-claims-that-competition-is...

emodendroket 9y ago
I mean, in the narrow sense he's of course right -- if you're a business owner or investor the logical thing to do is to aim to create a monopoly. Where I depart is the claim that this is also good for society as a whole.
- losteric 9y ago
  I agree - didn't feel it was worth mentioning considering the original and the criticism I linked to :) I like drawing parallels between economics and ecology... monopolies are farms, massive artificial monocultures that suppress natural competition and extract value for the profit of a few. They embody a cycle of growth and stagnation. A healthy economy is more like a jungle, innumerable smaller competitors with diverse approaches to survival... an extremely resilient and constantly evolving ecosystem that leads to fascinating innovation.
  - jasode 9y ago
    >A healthy economy is more like a jungle, innumerable smaller competitors ... that leads to fascinating innovation. I think you missed PT's point. The word "monopoly" has overshadowed his message. He wants people to pursue "blue ocean"[1] ideas to be innovative. Instead of starting a company that makes another generic clone of aspirin, you pursue a drug that cures breast cancer. Or instead of building a business that broadcasts 150 characters (hey we offer you +10 more characters than Twitter), do something more innovative for society like building cheap flying cars. I'd venture to guess that 99% actually agree with PT's underlying idea (innovation) but the distasteful word "monopoly" has completely drowned out the message. The term "blue ocean" is the same concept -- it just doesn't rile people up as much. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Ocean_Strategy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Ocean_Strategy
    - emodendroket 9y ago
      Does the typical investor really care if the idea is a cure for breast cancer or "driving all existing providers in some space out of business and then mopping up the market"?
      - jasode 9y ago
        Yes, investors care about the goals of the business. See the promises of Theranos' "40 tests and detect cancer from a single drop of blood". I can't think of a VC that has the investment thesis of "put money into businesses that has cutthroat competition and drive others out of business". Theranos had promises of "blue ocean". No competition. This attracted investors like moths to a flame. (We now know they had no competitors because their technology was a fraud.) The investors would have been better off investing in a boring factory making generic aspirin ("red oceans of bloody competition").
        emodendroket 9y ago
        I'd argue that's basically what Uber is trying to do.
        jasode 9y ago
        Fyi... Peter Thiel thinks Uber is overvalued. He didn't like the way they compete. Uber should be a case study that burning up billions in investor money (billions wasted on trying to underprice Didi in China) was a colossal mistake. How much of that bad strategy is blamed on Travis's vs investors is something we won't know until a tell-all book comes out.
        emodendroket 9y ago
        I think they're likely overvalued too, but it seems to be an obvious counterexample of the claims about investor behavior regardless.
    - losteric 9y ago