3 ms·
There's an anology that can be made to businesses that have only one client (where 'only' is defined as more than about 70% of revenue). That's a dependence whi
by JacobAldridge 16y ago
There's an anology that can be made to businesses that have only one client (where 'only' is defined as more than about 70% of revenue). That's a dependence which is, ultimately, outside of your control - meaning your business's future is ultimately outside of your control.
It's interesting that, offline, when I work with companies who have that dependence they know it's their biggest risk. For most owners, it's the stress ball in the pit of their stomach that keeps them up at night - what happens if that client cancels the contract / is late with their invoices / goes into Administration?
I don't seem to get that feeling from business owners dependent on a platform like Facebook and Twitter. Maybe I don't know enough of them. Maybe they don't realise how fraught with danger their entire business model is.
- r00fus 16y agoThere's a flaw in your analogy. In the first case, there is a more direct relationship to the monopsonist (ie, super-customer), but in the case of Facebook/Twitter, there is strength in numbers (your company relying on FB/Twitter is likely one of thousands). Relying on a platform is not new in business, and the standards and ethics are fairly understood... ask the eBay sellers in the 90s or folks who made parts for typewriters back in the 70s.