4 ms·

Off topic: I stopped a long time ago paying for Ben Thompson newsletter. He writes a lot of words that sound smart but ultimately don’t impart much actual cont

Off topic: I stopped a long time ago paying for Ben Thompson newsletter. He writes a lot of words that sound smart but ultimately don’t impart much actual content or information. This post is a stereotypical example. I don’t understand why so many folks praise his “analysis” on topics.

1123581321 4y ago
Who or what do you read instead for coverage on the same topics?
- chipotle_coyote 4y ago
  While I’ve just started reading it, Casey Newton’s “Platformer” newsletter seems like genuinely informed coverage of the tech industry. Stratechery is focused more on the business side, so they’re not identical, but I do think Thompson can be a little more blinded by his own biases—his analyses are often of the “clearly, [thing X] happened because of [theme I keep returning to],” and as entertaining as his articles are, they’re starting to feel a bit like cork boards covered with index cards and colored twine, where all the links are to things he’s written previously. (Disclosure: I’m a Stratechery subscriber over the last few years considering dropping down to a membership only for the twice-weekly Dithering podcast.)
  - 1123581321 4y ago
    Casey’s is interesting, good at the stories pre-occupying users more than investors. Glad he’s having a big moment right now with Twitter. His coverage of Basecamp last year was good. What I find with Thompson is that his big public stories have the problems you describe, but the paid content is succinct and pulling in the best parts of news stories. I’d almost rather have the option to skip the big stories and receive everything else. I also like the interviews, though recently I’ve been amused by how often the same guest appears on Nilay Patel’s podcast in the same week. (They are as well and discussed it on each other’s podcasts together.) I’m quick to skip ads, so the listening experience is similar. My perhaps uncharitable guess is that the user who started this discussion doesn’t have any need of analysis in their job, or isn’t busy enough to benefit from a paid news filter. But I’m still hoping to hear from them.
- jjtheblunt 4y ago
  I think ft.com (The Financial Times) is more concise.
  - 1123581321 4y ago
    FT has been a long-time read for me. I suppose Alphaville is the closest corollary to Thompson’s big columns and selective reading of Companies and Markets bulletins is closest to the daily updates.
throwaway98797 4y ago
i’m with you folks want someone to be their oracle scott galloway is another one whose in the business of writing credible narratives that might as well be fiction the only thing i read now are facts and even those i stick to top line numbers like revenue ultimately if i’m not investing no way i can know what’s going on and even if i have the facts there’s no chance i can predict it follows that i don’t really believe anyone else can either all we can do is focus on the problems in front of us, talk is cheap. so just do something. build, organize, lead all else is for the feel gooders not the doers be somebody do something
googlryas 4y ago
That's something I also don't get. I've read most of his posts which appear on HN, but I don't quite get the point of it, or these kind of post hoc analyses in general. Some events happen with with parties A,B, and C. Party X later writes a story about why A-C did those things. These narratives may give us the illusion of comprehension, but how do we determine the truth of them, versus just a plausible but incorrect story. Not to sound like a pragmatist, because I do believe there is a benefit to non practical arts, but do these blogs help us predict future events? If they don't, are they just providing an illusion of order on a disorderly, mind bogglingly complex world?
- DenisM 4y ago
  Perhaps they help us compress complex memories into compact narratives?
- metacritic12 4y ago
  Post-hoc is right. First he predicts (pre 2019) that crypto won't amount to anything. This is his true belief. Then in 2020s with crypto mania he gets carried away and writes a bunch of articles saying how it can be great. Now with one exchange failing, he retreats back to his cave of "oh there's nothing here after all". In some ways, he's just a jpg of the past decades' stock charts -- an interesting compression of the past, but not great at predicting the future. If he were better, he could do something like pick undervalued growth stocks, or do sector allocation. The equivalent of global macro for technologies. He doesn't do anything close to it, and that tells you all you need to know about the future predictive power of his theories.
ilrwbwrkhv 4y ago
Agreed. He is like the Jordan Peterson of the business world. I think a lot of people subscribe to him to feel a certain "intelligent by association".
yawnxyz 4y ago
I read the blog from time to time. I really liked his posts on Aggregation Theory (https://stratechery.com/2022/spotify-netflix-and-aggregation/ https://stratechery.com/2022/spotify-netflix-and-aggregation...). As someone who's always been making stuff in a bootstrapped way, it gives me a different perspective on how to think about what I'm making, and how I could position what I'm doing to others (customers, friends; not necessarily investors). I'm in the academia / biotech / clinical tech space, and Ben's level of "academicking" is refreshingly to the point compared to how other people in this space write and publish.
hammock 4y ago
His analysis is hit or miss. Hard to avoid that outcome when you are under pressure to produce a prolific amount of content in a regular basis
nocoiner 4y ago
This is a concise articulation of something that’s been nagging me for a while. I have his free articles in my RSS feed, but for a while I’ve been noticing that the gems of analysis are few and far between, and increasingly outweighed by the need to parse through many, many other words that don’t seem to convey very much.
- jelling 4y ago
  Paid news letters are the “publish or perish” of the non-academic world.
  - nocoiner 4y ago
    Missed this the other day - brilliant comparison!

1123581321 4y ago

Who or what do you read instead for coverage on the same topics?

chipotle_coyote 4y ago
While I’ve just started reading it, Casey Newton’s “Platformer” newsletter seems like genuinely informed coverage of the tech industry. Stratechery is focused more on the business side, so they’re not identical, but I do think Thompson can be a little more blinded by his own biases—his analyses are often of the “clearly, [thing X] happened because of [theme I keep returning to],” and as entertaining as his articles are, they’re starting to feel a bit like cork boards covered with index cards and colored twine, where all the links are to things he’s written previously. (Disclosure: I’m a Stratechery subscriber over the last few years considering dropping down to a membership only for the twice-weekly Dithering podcast.)
- 1123581321 4y ago
  Casey’s is interesting, good at the stories pre-occupying users more than investors. Glad he’s having a big moment right now with Twitter. His coverage of Basecamp last year was good. What I find with Thompson is that his big public stories have the problems you describe, but the paid content is succinct and pulling in the best parts of news stories. I’d almost rather have the option to skip the big stories and receive everything else. I also like the interviews, though recently I’ve been amused by how often the same guest appears on Nilay Patel’s podcast in the same week. (They are as well and discussed it on each other’s podcasts together.) I’m quick to skip ads, so the listening experience is similar. My perhaps uncharitable guess is that the user who started this discussion doesn’t have any need of analysis in their job, or isn’t busy enough to benefit from a paid news filter. But I’m still hoping to hear from them.
jjtheblunt 4y ago
I think ft.com (The Financial Times) is more concise.
- 1123581321 4y ago
  FT has been a long-time read for me. I suppose Alphaville is the closest corollary to Thompson’s big columns and selective reading of Companies and Markets bulletins is closest to the daily updates.

throwaway98797 4y ago

i’m with you folks want someone to be their oracle scott galloway is another one whose in the business of writing credible narratives that might as well be fiction the only thing i read now are facts and even those i stick to top line numbers like revenue ultimately if i’m not investing no way i can know what’s going on and even if i have the facts there’s no chance i can predict it follows that i don’t really believe anyone else can either all we can do is focus on the problems in front of us, talk is cheap. so just do something. build, organize, lead all else is for the feel gooders not the doers be somebody do something

googlryas 4y ago

That's something I also don't get. I've read most of his posts which appear on HN, but I don't quite get the point of it, or these kind of post hoc analyses in general. Some events happen with with parties A,B, and C. Party X later writes a story about why A-C did those things. These narratives may give us the illusion of comprehension, but how do we determine the truth of them, versus just a plausible but incorrect story. Not to sound like a pragmatist, because I do believe there is a benefit to non practical arts, but do these blogs help us predict future events? If they don't, are they just providing an illusion of order on a disorderly, mind bogglingly complex world?

DenisM 4y ago
Perhaps they help us compress complex memories into compact narratives?
metacritic12 4y ago
Post-hoc is right. First he predicts (pre 2019) that crypto won't amount to anything. This is his true belief. Then in 2020s with crypto mania he gets carried away and writes a bunch of articles saying how it can be great. Now with one exchange failing, he retreats back to his cave of "oh there's nothing here after all". In some ways, he's just a jpg of the past decades' stock charts -- an interesting compression of the past, but not great at predicting the future. If he were better, he could do something like pick undervalued growth stocks, or do sector allocation. The equivalent of global macro for technologies. He doesn't do anything close to it, and that tells you all you need to know about the future predictive power of his theories.

ilrwbwrkhv 4y ago

Agreed. He is like the Jordan Peterson of the business world. I think a lot of people subscribe to him to feel a certain "intelligent by association".

yawnxyz 4y ago

I read the blog from time to time. I really liked his posts on Aggregation Theory (https://stratechery.com/2022/spotify-netflix-and-aggregation/ https://stratechery.com/2022/spotify-netflix-and-aggregation...). As someone who's always been making stuff in a bootstrapped way, it gives me a different perspective on how to think about what I'm making, and how I could position what I'm doing to others (customers, friends; not necessarily investors). I'm in the academia / biotech / clinical tech space, and Ben's level of "academicking" is refreshingly to the point compared to how other people in this space write and publish.

hammock 4y ago

His analysis is hit or miss. Hard to avoid that outcome when you are under pressure to produce a prolific amount of content in a regular basis

nocoiner 4y ago

This is a concise articulation of something that’s been nagging me for a while. I have his free articles in my RSS feed, but for a while I’ve been noticing that the gems of analysis are few and far between, and increasingly outweighed by the need to parse through many, many other words that don’t seem to convey very much.

jelling 4y ago
Paid news letters are the “publish or perish” of the non-academic world.
- nocoiner 4y ago
  Missed this the other day - brilliant comparison!