5 ms·

I think his point is that the next hugely successful billionaire will not be creating a competitor to something that is already hugely successful today. That's

by Haul4ss 12y ago

I think his point is that the next hugely successful billionaire will not be creating a competitor to something that is already hugely successful today. That's not to say you can't make a comfortable living building a better mousetrap. It just means you won't be Gates or Zuckerberg. Of course, you could easily make the argument that Gates (for example) merely built a better mousetrap. It's not like Microsoft invented the operating system. Or the personal computer. Or word processing. Microsoft, through strategy, lots of hard work, and a little luck, happened to be doing just the right thing at just the right time.

lrm242 12y ago
Wait, you mean like Elon Musk? The guy is not only competing against hugely successful incumbents, but he's doing it in parallel in two markets! Somewhat ironic given Musk and Thiel are cut from the same cloth. Thiel's book might be a fun read. Take from it what you want, but it certainly isn't gospel.
- adventured 12y ago
  Or Bezos in retailing. First he beat Barnes & Noble etc, then he beat Walmart and Target (and everyone else). All from a guy that hadn't spent a minute in retail previously. Both Bezos and Musk took advantage of an exception to what Thiel is talking about: inflection points in technology sometimes provide massive competitive openings that are better viewed as blue ocean because they're so different from the establishment.
prof_hobart 12y ago
I know that's his point. I just think that history has proven his point wrong. None of his examples - Zuckerberg, Gates, Brin or Page got rich out of creating a whole new concept - social media, OSs and search engines existed and were fairly successful things before any of those came along. They all got rich by a combination of building a better mousetrap, smart business moves and luck. And if someone else comes along and does any of those things (or any other existing business concept) far better than any of these people, or come up with a success enough differentiator in the the same general industry sector - like Jack Dorsey et al did with Twitter for example - they may well become wildly rich as well. Of course, the more established an industry sector is, the harder and harder it becomes to do something that is differentiating enough to allow you to become wildly rich from it. But there's countless examples across countless industries that show it's far from impossible. People still become hugely rich from innovations in banking, in retail and transport. And none of those are new industries.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

by Haul4ss 12y ago

lrm242 12y ago

Wait, you mean like Elon Musk? The guy is not only competing against hugely successful incumbents, but he's doing it in parallel in two markets! Somewhat ironic given Musk and Thiel are cut from the same cloth. Thiel's book might be a fun read. Take from it what you want, but it certainly isn't gospel.

adventured 12y ago
Or Bezos in retailing. First he beat Barnes & Noble etc, then he beat Walmart and Target (and everyone else). All from a guy that hadn't spent a minute in retail previously. Both Bezos and Musk took advantage of an exception to what Thiel is talking about: inflection points in technology sometimes provide massive competitive openings that are better viewed as blue ocean because they're so different from the establishment.

prof_hobart 12y ago

I know that's his point. I just think that history has proven his point wrong. None of his examples - Zuckerberg, Gates, Brin or Page got rich out of creating a whole new concept - social media, OSs and search engines existed and were fairly successful things before any of those came along. They all got rich by a combination of building a better mousetrap, smart business moves and luck. And if someone else comes along and does any of those things (or any other existing business concept) far better than any of these people, or come up with a success enough differentiator in the the same general industry sector - like Jack Dorsey et al did with Twitter for example - they may well become wildly rich as well. Of course, the more established an industry sector is, the harder and harder it becomes to do something that is differentiating enough to allow you to become wildly rich from it. But there's countless examples across countless industries that show it's far from impossible. People still become hugely rich from innovations in banking, in retail and transport. And none of those are new industries.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]