I think there's an interesting question (and answer) in this article but the author doesn't make it. Here's what I believe to be the fundamental error the auth

I think there's an interesting question (and answer) in this article but the author doesn't make it. Here's what I believe to be the fundamental error the author is making as highlighted by this throwaway line: """ ... The distribution is not quite that precise. Sometimes you will see a 90/10 relationship or a 75/25 split. But the key finding is that every activity is concentrated among heavy users and popular products. """ If the split goes down to 60/40 (40% sales lead to 60% profits), this starts getting into "real" money in terms of trying to capture the other 40% of the profits. Any overhead in terms of distribution, discovery, labor, rent, etc. will eat into that profit pushing it towards more of a 80/20 rule, or even 90/10. The talk of "long tail" in this context is noticing that iTunes, Netflix and Amazon don't need brick and mortar real estate, don't need warehouses of inventory (in some cases), don't need expensive distribution channels, etc. All those extra costs diminish profits. If the marginal costs of storage and distribution drop drastically this effectively changies the 80/20 rule into a 60/40 one, allowing them to not only reduce the reliance on "superstar" sellers by changing the proportion but also access the remaining tail of consumers. To further highlight the author's misread, here's another excerpt: """ The digital world hardly changes this equation. Even if Amazon doesn’t operate stores, it still has expenses (rent, labor, etc.), not much different than a bookstore. """ I'm not sure Borders or Barnes and Nobles ever broke double digit billions of worth. Amazon is values at over a trillion dollars. It's not that the author is incorrect, the equation is the same, but the generalization of the equation and it's realization seems to be lost on the author. The 80/20 rule can actually be 60/40. To say that Amazon is not much different than a bookstore is like saying a solar system is not much different than a galaxy. Yes, they still obey rules of physics but the scale and scope of relevant details are vastly different. But, this is all a guess on my part. I think it's easy enough to debunk the article on various aspects. Mostly this can come down to what a good definition of "long tail" is and what you're actually trying to point out. I do think there is a question underlying the article that should be answered. I think the better question is "Is the 80/20 rule a convergent rule, or can it go down to 60/40 (say) and what are the conditions in which this rule manifests?". There's also the question of how much resources to devote to providing "long tail" access to whatever product you're selling or market you're in and even if the ratio can be changed from 80/20 to 60/40, say.