Perhaps its just my read, but I think the original post confuses revenue streams with business models with products. It seems to flip from business model to pro

Perhaps its just my read, but I think the original post confuses revenue streams with business models with products. It seems to flip from business model to product design to revenue streams back to business models and finishes with a vague statement about "core". Selling complimentary products and services to overlapping and peripheral market segments is an extremely valid and sustainable strategy (Apple). Using different methods of distribution to attack different market segments with similar products works extremely well (Amazon, Google). Launching additional lines of business to attack unrelated markets using a singular strong brand also has merit (Virgin). The key really is "don't have a shitty business model" not "don't have multiple revenue streams". On the other hand, I really appreciate Rob's points about how clever often means convoluted (I am always wary of "complicated") and that mediocrity and a lack of focus can be dilutive.