Despite what some others say this is a great simplified insight to breaking down further the improbable aspects of an industry. I’m going for this book.
By "YouSum Live" 00:00:30 Understanding digital disruption and startup success 00:00:57 Decoupling the customer value chain with Uber 00:01:58 Importance of customer value chain in disruption 00:02:52 Identifying weak links for decoupling opportunities 00:04:26 Types of decoupling activities in various industries 00:07:16 Investors' preference for value-creating decouplers 00:07:41 Impact of decoupling on attracting unsatisfied customers 00:08:01 Coupling: expanding activities post decoupling 00:08:50 Uncertainty in profitability despite providing value 00:09:42 Steps in the decoupling process for startups 00:13:28 Recognizing the weakest link for successful disruption 00:15:09 Opportunities for decoupling arise from customer dissatisfaction 00:16:25 Utilizing AI for enhancing customer value through decoupling 00:18:24 Advice on applying decoupling concepts for business success By "YouSum Live"
That’s why so many businesses fail, because they are established mostly by people without systems and knowledge/experience, inability to execute, inability to scale and raise capital, but with what they think is a ‘good idea’ and grinding. This content was genius.
This your comment nearly made me stop watching this wonderful video. The Uber example is just one example, and he's not here to talk about history of Uber. Hes just talking about the value Uber offers and the problem they solved. Please stop spreading bad energy.
Take away: Decouple the value chain activities and identify things that make customers unhappy: * Expensive activities - make cheaper * Time consuming activities - make faster * Too much effort ( Time to value creation is long ) - make easier
The full process for this kind of market analysis is: Choose a big general market you wanna play: Food, Tech, Medicine, Steel, Etc… -> Do the Industry Value chain analysis/ Customer Value Chain analysis to pick a node in that chain for you to jump in. Then do an STP analysis to find the easy-to-join, high growth rate, and profitable to build a business around. Remember to always choose things you have an interest in and know/ have an unfair advantage to do business.
@@MCLottotv Brother. If you dislike risk and are very risk adverse; let me ask you to pause and reconsider how to define risk. Be an entrepreneur and risk losing your investment? Of course, but you only need ONE to really succeed! Work as an employee for a guaranteed paycheck? 100% guaranteed to die broke and under someone else's rules, will, and best interests. 100% guaranteed. What is a bigger risk than that? The few financial upsides of being an employee are mostly gone anyway; no more pensions, no more loyalty, average person moves every 2-3 year to actually improve their salary, and now literally EVERYONE is just a dispensable number NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO FOR THEM. And have they earned a lot of money off the sweat of you brow? At least that will keep you safe, right? No, Sir. It is always, "What have you done for me LATELY."
Such an academic fraud! The only thing he do is copying existing concepts from others (like User journey mapping, lean startup, Value Proposition Canvas), changing the names, and making it look like he invented them
As someone who enjoyed reading the late Clayton Christensen's "The Innovator's Dilemma," which I personally view as a Thomas Kuhn's theory of scientific revolution applied to the business world, I am uncertain whether Thales Teixeira's theory is superior, as it seems to contradict Christensen's view. Specifically, Teixeira's point of attempting to decouple and disrupt existing business models could create resistance and be squashed by incumbents, as this upfront attack could face significant opposition. I believe that Christensen's stealthy move of serving customers who were ignored by the existing giants is a better approach, as exemplified by Walmart or even Target versus Amazon. By targeting overlooked segments initially, disruptors can gain a foothold before eventually challenging the incumbents, rather than directly confronting their established models from the outset.
You make a compelling case for Christensen’s approach in business disruption, particularly noting its effectiveness in allowing new entrants to carve out a niche quietly before taking on industry giants. This strategic subtlety indeed seems less confrontational and perhaps more sustainable in the long run. However, considering the dynamics of modern markets, Teixeira's theory could also have its merits, particularly in industries that are ripe for rapid transformation due to technological advances or shifting consumer expectations. To add another dimension to this discussion, let's consider the example of Netflix in the digital streaming industry. Initially, Netflix did not confront traditional giants directly. Instead, they offered a DVD rental service by mail, targeting a niche market of movie enthusiasts who were underserved by the inconvenience of physical rental stores. This approach aligns with Christensen’s strategy of focusing on overlooked segments. Over time, as they established a strong customer base and a robust distribution network, Netflix shifted gears by introducing streaming services. This move, which decouples content consumption from physical and scheduled constraints, embodies Teixeira’s idea of disrupting existing business models. It was a direct challenge to the established practices of cable and rental services, leveraging technological advancements to disrupt the status quo. Netflix’s strategy showcases how a company can start with a Christensen-like approach to gain initial traction and then adopt Teixeira’s aggressive disruption tactics as they grow stronger and more capable of handling competitive pressures. This dual strategy allowed Netflix to not only enter the market with minimal resistance but also to redefine it entirely, demonstrating the potential effectiveness of integrating both theories depending on the stage of business development and market conditions. Your preference for Christensen’s method is well-justified, especially in industries where a quieter entry might prevent immediate and possibly overwhelming retaliation from incumbents. However, the Netflix example illustrates that there could be strategic value in eventually shifting toward Teixeira’s approach as companies stabilize and look to capitalize on broader systemic inefficiencies. What are your thoughts on the potential for such a phased or hybrid approach in business disruption strategies?
@@scrollblau2262 Thank you for the thoughtful comments. I believe we are on the same page, as I also think that starting with a niche market but having the ambition to revolutionize the business world is crucial. Without such ambition, a business would remain a mom-and-pop store. The revolutionary force of Amazon is a perfect example of this. Jeff Bezos embodies the philosophy of "think big, but start small." When Bezos quit his Wall Street job to start an internet company nearly three decades ago, envisioning a future where people could buy refrigerators online, many thought he had gone mad. At that time, hardly anyone believed they would buy anything online when they could “easily” do the same at brick-and-mortar stores. Despite his dream of revolutionizing the business world, Bezos began Amazon by selling used college books from his proverbial garage, packaging the books himself. I recall him mentioning in an interview that his first business purchase was knee pads because he needed to wrap the books on the floor. Bezos dreamt big but didn't start by attacking the entire market. Instead, he began small, proving his concept step by step.
I think he explained what you are talking about when he described the way Uber met the needs of people that could not be served by existing taxi companies. Once they had a solid taxi service they then branched out and disrupted other industries.
@@DanielSolis33 I guess I am turned off by the speaker's apparent assumption that business is a science that can be replicated, when in truth even the best chemistry experiments face replication problems (with many experiments not being replicable, as highlighted by the replication crisis in science). Most startups are constantly pivoting, demonstrating that business success is not algorithmic or easily replicable. As seen in the case of Netflix vs. Blockbuster, which I learned about from the podcast "Business Wars" (not on Netflix), Blockbuster tried to steal Netflix's process and approach but could not copy the soul of Netflix - its software and innovative culture.
I’m not sure that this is what he’s trying to do. My sense is that he’s attempting curate a theory of disruptive innovation. A value chain perspective allows the student to analyse markets and consumers, to isolate factors that have disruptive potential. As theories go, it could provide explanatory potential, reproducibility, generalisability and maybe prediction. I think you’re referring to a business strategy which helps with acceptance in the face of disruptive innovation, using a targeted focus on marginalised customers (I.e., targeting a narrow market segment).
What’s interesting about most of the examples given here is the value eroding activities being avoided are REGULATORY. What these startups figured out is if you move fast enough, the regulatory environment often can’t keep up. Uber put a lot of unregulated drivers on the road. AirBnB put a lot of unregulated hoteliers on the market. Yes, some of them figured out how to automate or otherwise streamline regulatory hurdles, yet the others just ignored them and treated the eventual fines or other legal issues something they would deal with later (kicking the can).
Excellent. In Design Thinking we use “the user journey”. Map out a typical task (or have the user map out a typical task), which steps are involved, which are the biggest pain points. Adding a value driven spin to it helps to see where a solution might have the biggest impact, allowing to capture the created value. And yes, testing and pivoting is a part of it - you can’t predict the future!
Would have taken this seriously but there’s so many mindless people getting rich “providing value” doing the most random sh*t & not considering ANYTHING he just said in this video…😴 everyone’s a genius once they get some money.
Has this guy built a business? Getting a checking account would quickly looking at the top 3 options, deciding, and moving on. You don’t look at every option lol
The Uber story was partly because they made a way any car driver could ferry passengers in a efficient/safe way, and they subsidized the heck out of the fares to gain market share at huge loss. The subsidized fare was critical and leaving that part out glamorizes Uber when it was never profitable for a long time in the past.
@@ravanpee1325 this is such a crucial point, it skirted regulations to achieve scale, this is a hard thing to do unless you're pioneering something new which can fall in a legal grey area
@@sriramananthakrishnan138 It's not scaling but rather which company has more Lobbying power to doge regulations like Boeing now or the Sacklers in the past with the Opiod crisis
Not exactly. Uber originally started with Black cars, which wasn't anyone with a car. It was Lyft that introduced any car and driver model. Then Uber copied it as Uber X and both companies heavily subsidized fares.
But how come an MBA professor couldn't come up with the idea of UBER? It occurs to me that there is a significant gap between academic knowledge and real inventions.
So to sum up, if you want your value added idea to actually be a PROFITABLE business model just assume that every prospective client is a LAZY client and the more "hand holding" you can do for them, the more money you will make 😂 but seriously, great value add in this video, good job!
The exmaple of Steam removing the value erroding activity of going to the store is imho a misrepresentation. Steam came at a time when every game could be downloaded via torrent and cracks were provided to play them without actually buying them. Steam was no benefit to the "consumer". Steam was enforced onto them.
The torrent and cracks using part of the targeted audience is split into two groups. The much bigger group was just using it because of the value of "not going to the store" it provided. The "free" part of it was always tied to some kind of risk, so as Steam provided a solution without risk, everyone went for it. And as for the much smaller group of wich one either do not had the money for the activity or was a true believer of open-source, yes on them it was forced on.
There is an important piece missing here, which most MBAs are never taught. Business ethics. That is a concept that has been bleached out of western society largely because the ideas in MBAs are insensitive to the side effects of making a buck no matter the societal fallout, issues faced in many developed nations where business is encouraged to run amokx and neglecting ethical conduct, ACTUAL ethical practices. MBA programs are disgracefully vacant in these concepts.
Why do so many entrepreneurs not have MBA”s let alone Ivy League MBA’s? Because entrepreneurs instinctually understand filling market needs and work like hell to fill them while Ivy League businesses professors spend their time researching and pontificating about the obvious.
Summary: There are things customers hate, fix them. - Uber There are things customers like, give it/create it for them. - Twitch There are things you can improve, improve it. - Pill Pack
tl;dr To make a successful startup, find a problem in a common process, like how Uber made getting a ride easier by matching drivers and passengers quickly.
Fine but the cost of energy/storage still cost 💲+ all the earnings and payments of xyz startups , they can probably attract more broader market but at the same salary ? - and the living of cost it’s also increasing.
Isn't just like calling a taxi, except technology took that job. Business see in New York especially has criterias to follow. Kinda like scalping. So we go around it with an app like we're just picking up our friends while we're traveling in that direction. Then it turned into taxi business with individual contractors. Cutting out all that in-between. Guess they'll see soon as drama unfolds and electric cars...
MBAs: "If you are receiving more money than you are investing in your business of doing whatever, you are creating 'value'. What is 'value'? I don't care, as long as I'm making money."
This can also be done in a small, niche, local scale as well. Great info and thx! Will start using a microscope to identify the CVC in everything around me, and identify the weak leak (s).
Great knowledge from here! I love these business school professors for their ability to decomplexify common strategies used in several businesses which are not documented
The problem with this line of thinking is because anyone can do it, a lot of people end up doing the same thing. You face a lot of competitors and then you end up giving up value to the market to gain market share thereby negating the value capture of your company. This is also about value capture and not value creation. You can capture value from existing competitors, but you're not creating something new, which again means your ceiling becomes limited.
Few people are digital entrepreneurs. A district near me added 'food catering truck management' to the school's curriculum. Fill a consumer's needs and compete.
I've been wanting to start trading for several months and I've been procrastinating for no reason, but you encouraged me with this video to start at this moment.
I think that most of the tech business ideas are gone. New startups trying to make it into the space today are struggling because the ones that started it all are still the household names.
Take away 1. From customer spective, Identify the worth solving problems in term of money, time, effort 2. Predict competitor response 3. Fall in love with the problems not the AI aka solution. Make sure the worth-solving problems get done
Crush-It Conference 2024 | SF | July 18th | Discovering Productivity Tools in AI Era
Get Your Tickets 🎟 bit.ly/3S0brbE
So the summary is, finding problems in any activity that are hard and take time, and then make it easier for customers.
you're forgetting the decoupling part,
@@RaviAgarwal-d3j and the coupling part. Like Uber taking over taxis and providing food delivery.
Yes, that is basically what he is saying. That is not new?
No you forgot to couple and then decouple
thank you, for that
Despite what some others say this is a great simplified insight to breaking down further the improbable aspects of an industry. I’m going for this book.
By "YouSum Live"
00:00:30 Understanding digital disruption and startup success
00:00:57 Decoupling the customer value chain with Uber
00:01:58 Importance of customer value chain in disruption
00:02:52 Identifying weak links for decoupling opportunities
00:04:26 Types of decoupling activities in various industries
00:07:16 Investors' preference for value-creating decouplers
00:07:41 Impact of decoupling on attracting unsatisfied customers
00:08:01 Coupling: expanding activities post decoupling
00:08:50 Uncertainty in profitability despite providing value
00:09:42 Steps in the decoupling process for startups
00:13:28 Recognizing the weakest link for successful disruption
00:15:09 Opportunities for decoupling arise from customer dissatisfaction
00:16:25 Utilizing AI for enhancing customer value through decoupling
00:18:24 Advice on applying decoupling concepts for business success
By "YouSum Live"
Thank you for this master class! I love and appreciate the science of business. Well done!
Very well explained, Professor.
Kudos.
Thank you.
Thank you!
Decoupling
superb awesome information
How many "high growth" startups have you designed?
So he is value generating by making this video and then value coupling by shilling his book🤙
great
Lots of words......
All of this is navel-gazing for academics. Nobody actually starts a business by thinking like this.
That’s why so many businesses fail, because they are established mostly by people without systems and knowledge/experience, inability to execute, inability to scale and raise capital, but with what they think is a ‘good idea’ and grinding. This content was genius.
Uber did. Google did. Gates did. Jobs & Woz did. Bezos did. Elon did, multiple times. What was your point again?
bullshido master
Totally agree! Btw, how many multi-billion dollar startups have you founded? 😊🙃
Sorry, but that was not the history and motivation of Uber. You're rewriting history in order to make your story work. Stick to the facts please.
That definitely wasn’t the initial idea and motivation behind Uber, but it is the problem they eventually solved, so he’s not entirely wrong.
This your comment nearly made me stop watching this wonderful video.
The Uber example is just one example, and he's not here to talk about history of Uber.
Hes just talking about the value Uber offers and the problem they solved.
Please stop spreading bad energy.
👏👏👏
Lol sounds like the Quran.
Oh, you were behind the scenes at Uber? No? Cool.
How to steal customers from large corps😂
Take away:
Decouple the value chain activities and identify things that make customers unhappy:
* Expensive activities - make cheaper
* Time consuming activities - make faster
* Too much effort ( Time to value creation is long ) - make easier
Cheaper
Faster
Easier
...
Make it more FUN 🎉😂❤
Take solve problems of other people
Thanks! Saved me 18 minutes
Have connections. Do deeper research and find that most tech success stories had met individuals who helped support their vision early on.
Give example to differentiate between faster and less time to value
😢is this the basic stuff taught at Harvard MBA!
He’s over complicating a basic thing
Yep
The full process for this kind of market analysis is: Choose a big general market you wanna play: Food, Tech, Medicine, Steel, Etc… -> Do the Industry Value chain analysis/ Customer Value Chain analysis to pick a node in that chain for you to jump in. Then do an STP analysis to find the easy-to-join, high growth rate, and profitable to build a business around. Remember to always choose things you have an interest in and know/ have an unfair advantage to do business.
Business is very iterative. It's not rational
@@omuani Yes. But if you do have a rationale, it would be better. My motto is "wrong plan is better than no plan".
Sounds like gambling to me
@@MCLottotv yeah, gambling all the way. But businesss is less risky and is not a zero sum game.
@@MCLottotv Brother. If you dislike risk and are very risk adverse; let me ask you to pause and reconsider how to define risk. Be an entrepreneur and risk losing your investment? Of course, but you only need ONE to really succeed! Work as an employee for a guaranteed paycheck? 100% guaranteed to die broke and under someone else's rules, will, and best interests. 100% guaranteed. What is a bigger risk than that? The few financial upsides of being an employee are mostly gone anyway; no more pensions, no more loyalty, average person moves every 2-3 year to actually improve their salary, and now literally EVERYONE is just a dispensable number NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO FOR THEM. And have they earned a lot of money off the sweat of you brow? At least that will keep you safe, right? No, Sir. It is always, "What have you done for me LATELY."
People complain about his rewriting of Uber's history, but I learned something new about the customer value chain and decoupling.
In simple terms, creating ease of access and providing the path of least resistance to your potential customers.
Such an academic fraud! The only thing he do is copying existing concepts from others (like User journey mapping, lean startup, Value Proposition Canvas), changing the names, and making it look like he invented them
He is explaining history and adapting his narrative to past events.
Nothing actionable just word salad.
As someone who enjoyed reading the late Clayton Christensen's "The Innovator's Dilemma," which I personally view as a Thomas Kuhn's theory of scientific revolution applied to the business world, I am uncertain whether Thales Teixeira's theory is superior, as it seems to contradict Christensen's view. Specifically, Teixeira's point of attempting to decouple and disrupt existing business models could create resistance and be squashed by incumbents, as this upfront attack could face significant opposition.
I believe that Christensen's stealthy move of serving customers who were ignored by the existing giants is a better approach, as exemplified by Walmart or even Target versus Amazon. By targeting overlooked segments initially, disruptors can gain a foothold before eventually challenging the incumbents, rather than directly confronting their established models from the outset.
You make a compelling case for Christensen’s approach in business disruption, particularly noting its effectiveness in allowing new entrants to carve out a niche quietly before taking on industry giants. This strategic subtlety indeed seems less confrontational and perhaps more sustainable in the long run. However, considering the dynamics of modern markets, Teixeira's theory could also have its merits, particularly in industries that are ripe for rapid transformation due to technological advances or shifting consumer expectations.
To add another dimension to this discussion, let's consider the example of Netflix in the digital streaming industry. Initially, Netflix did not confront traditional giants directly. Instead, they offered a DVD rental service by mail, targeting a niche market of movie enthusiasts who were underserved by the inconvenience of physical rental stores. This approach aligns with Christensen’s strategy of focusing on overlooked segments. Over time, as they established a strong customer base and a robust distribution network, Netflix shifted gears by introducing streaming services. This move, which decouples content consumption from physical and scheduled constraints, embodies Teixeira’s idea of disrupting existing business models. It was a direct challenge to the established practices of cable and rental services, leveraging technological advancements to disrupt the status quo.
Netflix’s strategy showcases how a company can start with a Christensen-like approach to gain initial traction and then adopt Teixeira’s aggressive disruption tactics as they grow stronger and more capable of handling competitive pressures. This dual strategy allowed Netflix to not only enter the market with minimal resistance but also to redefine it entirely, demonstrating the potential effectiveness of integrating both theories depending on the stage of business development and market conditions.
Your preference for Christensen’s method is well-justified, especially in industries where a quieter entry might prevent immediate and possibly overwhelming retaliation from incumbents. However, the Netflix example illustrates that there could be strategic value in eventually shifting toward Teixeira’s approach as companies stabilize and look to capitalize on broader systemic inefficiencies. What are your thoughts on the potential for such a phased or hybrid approach in business disruption strategies?
@@scrollblau2262 Thank you for the thoughtful comments. I believe we are on the same page, as I also think that starting with a niche market but having the ambition to revolutionize the business world is crucial. Without such ambition, a business would remain a mom-and-pop store. The revolutionary force of Amazon is a perfect example of this.
Jeff Bezos embodies the philosophy of "think big, but start small." When Bezos quit his Wall Street job to start an internet company nearly three decades ago, envisioning a future where people could buy refrigerators online, many thought he had gone mad. At that time, hardly anyone believed they would buy anything online when they could “easily” do the same at brick-and-mortar stores.
Despite his dream of revolutionizing the business world, Bezos began Amazon by selling used college books from his proverbial garage, packaging the books himself. I recall him mentioning in an interview that his first business purchase was knee pads because he needed to wrap the books on the floor. Bezos dreamt big but didn't start by attacking the entire market. Instead, he began small, proving his concept step by step.
I think he explained what you are talking about when he described the way Uber met the needs of people that could not be served by existing taxi companies.
Once they had a solid taxi service they then branched out and disrupted other industries.
@@DanielSolis33 I guess I am turned off by the speaker's apparent assumption that business is a science that can be replicated, when in truth even the best chemistry experiments face replication problems (with many experiments not being replicable, as highlighted by the replication crisis in science). Most startups are constantly pivoting, demonstrating that business success is not algorithmic or easily replicable. As seen in the case of Netflix vs. Blockbuster, which I learned about from the podcast "Business Wars" (not on Netflix), Blockbuster tried to steal Netflix's process and approach but could not copy the soul of Netflix - its software and innovative culture.
I’m not sure that this is what he’s trying to do. My sense is that he’s attempting curate a theory of disruptive innovation. A value chain perspective allows the student to analyse markets and consumers, to isolate factors that have disruptive potential.
As theories go, it could provide explanatory potential, reproducibility, generalisability and maybe prediction.
I think you’re referring to a business strategy which helps with acceptance in the face of disruptive innovation, using a targeted focus on marginalised customers (I.e., targeting a narrow market segment).
What’s interesting about most of the examples given here is the value eroding activities being avoided are REGULATORY. What these startups figured out is if you move fast enough, the regulatory environment often can’t keep up. Uber put a lot of unregulated drivers on the road. AirBnB put a lot of unregulated hoteliers on the market. Yes, some of them figured out how to automate or otherwise streamline regulatory hurdles, yet the others just ignored them and treated the eventual fines or other legal issues something they would deal with later (kicking the can).
Excellent point
I don't really learn from any college professor especially who never had his own business. I am sorry for that sigh
That shows you don’t know the difference between ‚street knowledge‘ and ‚book knowledge‘
Excellent. In Design Thinking we use “the user journey”. Map out a typical task (or have the user map out a typical task), which steps are involved, which are the biggest pain points. Adding a value driven spin to it helps to see where a solution might have the biggest impact, allowing to capture the created value.
And yes, testing and pivoting is a part of it - you can’t predict the future!
Such a great class
Wait? Ricky Ponting was a professor at Harvard Business School?
Would have taken this seriously but there’s so many mindless people getting rich “providing value” doing the most random sh*t & not considering ANYTHING he just said in this video…😴 everyone’s a genius once they get some money.
This is education? He created a "new language" to create his job! See a need, build the need, sell more to your existing customer base. My Gd what BS.
Playing video game is wasting time. NOT value creation actually 😂😂😅😅😅
I love how he has so many examples of each step of each concept that he mentions. The animations in the video also added much value to it.
Has this guy built a business? Getting a checking account would quickly looking at the top 3 options, deciding, and moving on. You don’t look at every option lol
The Uber story was partly because they made a way any car driver could ferry passengers in a efficient/safe way, and they subsidized the heck out of the fares to gain market share at huge loss. The subsidized fare was critical and leaving that part out glamorizes Uber when it was never profitable for a long time in the past.
Also Uber is de facto just a taxi without taxi regulation
@@ravanpee1325 this is such a crucial point, it skirted regulations to achieve scale, this is a hard thing to do unless you're pioneering something new which can fall in a legal grey area
@@sriramananthakrishnan138 It's not scaling but rather which company has more Lobbying power to doge regulations like Boeing now or the Sacklers in the past with the Opiod crisis
Not exactly. Uber originally started with Black cars, which wasn't anyone with a car. It was Lyft that introduced any car and driver model. Then Uber copied it as Uber X and both companies heavily subsidized fares.
@@brandonreed09 So Uber operated an illegal Taxi operation without paying >200.000$ for the medallion
We are so lucky to still have access to stuff like this for free.. Thank you.
Interesting concepts. Watch this video and don’t pay attention to the comments.
Imagine going to Harvard to learn this. Your dream college. Meanwhile Alex Hormozi is lightyears ahead these MBA folks.
It's 2024, everything but brand new technology is on the Internet for Free 😂
imagine simping for a shill like alex
@@Joe-sg9ll oh wait! you're right I forgot ... every product should be sold cheap to big young ladies.
@@filip3148 Ah yes, because I didn't took an education loan to study the same information which Alex made for free.
Guess I'm a simp then.
@@Joe-sg9ll😂😂 who told you that
So Vertical Scaling first by decoupling CVC, and then Horizontal Scaling by coupling CVC
There are some interesting thoughts, but it would be helpful if you new what Steam did and what it's business model was.
But how come an MBA professor couldn't come up with the idea of UBER? It occurs to me that there is a significant gap between academic knowledge and real inventions.
A teacher's job is to teach. If you're an entrepreneur, it's your job to identify business opportunities.
exactly. this professor in the video sounds like having too much "hindsight bias"
Wise comment
@@recoveryplanxyeah because teachers hate making money😂
Professors are being told what to teach. That is their job. As a student it is your job to figure out how to make money with the knowledge you have.
Why are you making simple topics so complex. I also don't agree with the use of your own technical jargon 😅 coupling seriously!
if it’s so simple for you then please do share your easy framework for explaining this in detail.
youtube algorithm, gimme more of this. thank you
So to sum up, if you want your value added idea to actually be a PROFITABLE business model just assume that every prospective client is a LAZY client and the more "hand holding" you can do for them, the more money you will make 😂 but seriously, great value add in this video, good job!
Excellent simplistic (easy to understand) explanation of what most digital products have done (and are trying to do)
That’s why you shouldn’t go to business school
The exmaple of Steam removing the value erroding activity of going to the store is imho a misrepresentation. Steam came at a time when every game could be downloaded via torrent and cracks were provided to play them without actually buying them. Steam was no benefit to the "consumer". Steam was enforced onto them.
The torrent and cracks using part of the targeted audience is split into two groups. The much bigger group was just using it because of the value of "not going to the store" it provided. The "free" part of it was always tied to some kind of risk, so as Steam provided a solution without risk, everyone went for it. And as for the much smaller group of wich one either do not had the money for the activity or was a true believer of open-source, yes on them it was forced on.
Good point there, thank you@@schneid3r-kay
How many times did he say read my book?
There is an important piece missing here, which most MBAs are never taught. Business ethics. That is a concept that has been bleached out of western society largely because the ideas in MBAs are insensitive to the side effects of making a buck no matter the societal fallout, issues faced in many developed nations where business is encouraged to run amokx and neglecting ethical conduct, ACTUAL ethical practices.
MBA programs are disgracefully vacant in these concepts.
This video is great, I don't what these guys in the comments are talking about, thank you so much professor.
I can tell this guy was a professor at Harvard because he does a lot of talking without really saying anything.
Just solve problems!
I still have this man book and just few days ago saw it in my kindle app to re-read it. Gems aplenty
Great broker choice! I'm here too. Profits were modest at first but now I’m a full-time trader.
Why do so many entrepreneurs not have MBA”s let alone Ivy League MBA’s? Because entrepreneurs instinctually understand filling market needs and work like hell to fill them while Ivy League businesses professors spend their time researching and pontificating about the obvious.
Summary:
There are things customers hate, fix them. - Uber
There are things customers like, give it/create it for them. - Twitch
There are things you can improve, improve it. - Pill Pack
This is the only business class you would ever need; it was well summarized and explained quickly. Thank you EO and Thales Teixeira.
One more guy explaining things retroactively.
tl;dr
To make a successful startup, find a problem in a common process, like how Uber made getting a ride easier by matching drivers and passengers quickly.
Even shorter:
Find a problem provide solution. Money or time.
Fine but the cost of energy/storage still cost 💲+ all the earnings and payments of xyz startups , they can probably attract more broader market but at the same salary ? - and the living of cost it’s also increasing.
It’s incredible that we have access to such high quality content, for free
I'm sorry but if you were an academic at Harvard then there's a darn good chance you're a plagiarist So sorry can't trust this article
EO Builders Club link is not working, showing 404.
Steal ideas that others developed, market it as yours and make money safely, while stealing
If it’s being taught in degree courses. It’s already out of date.
Holt crap this guy is boring. Just goes to show that stating the obvious in a boring way can be a career
Too text-bookish to be interesting or practical. This gentleman was just verbatim without being passionate about the subject.
He looks like Bashar al-Assad 😂
Yep. Portuguese looks like Arabic
Formidable comment peut-on rentrer en contact avec l'invité
Gonzalez Ronald Thomas Susan Robinson Anthony
"Just So" . Now memorize. Get MBA
Moore Karen Thompson Margaret Garcia Michael
Wilson Ronald Rodriguez Donald Harris Lisa
Martinez Mark Rodriguez Laura Brown Mark
No backgroundmusic is better.
Martinez Jason Taylor Amy Martin Karen
In other words: help the customer even more.
Isn't just like calling a taxi, except technology took that job. Business see in New York especially has criterias to follow. Kinda like scalping. So we go around it with an app like we're just picking up our friends while we're traveling in that direction. Then it turned into taxi business with individual contractors. Cutting out all that in-between. Guess they'll see soon as drama unfolds and electric cars...
What do you mean "stole" customers.
MBAs: "If you are receiving more money than you are investing in your business of doing whatever, you are creating 'value'. What is 'value'? I don't care, as long as I'm making money."
Great Professor! So much of the knowledge in just one video.
4:11 3 types of Value related stuff: Value ... Creating/Capturing/Eroding
¿Puedes hablar más sobre el análisis técnico en las opciones binarias en tu próximo video?
This can also be done in a small, niche, local scale as well. Great info and thx! Will start using a microscope to identify the CVC in everything around me, and identify the weak leak (s).
Great knowledge from here! I love these business school professors for their ability to decomplexify common strategies used in several businesses which are not documented
If you think steam is a video game streaming platform you should not be teaching business. Just a idea...
oh i can sum up : try to provide better customer experience. which is true, but.... I don't think anyone need to go to Harvard to know that 😂
When costs and efforts to purchase a certain product or service are rising, this might be an opportunity.
The problem with this line of thinking is because anyone can do it, a lot of people end up doing the same thing. You face a lot of competitors and then you end up giving up value to the market to gain market share thereby negating the value capture of your company. This is also about value capture and not value creation. You can capture value from existing competitors, but you're not creating something new, which again means your ceiling becomes limited.
Amazing value in this video. Thanks for sharing!
Few people are digital entrepreneurs.
A district near me added 'food catering truck management' to the school's curriculum.
Fill a consumer's needs and compete.
I've been wanting to start trading for several months and I've been procrastinating for no reason, but you encouraged me with this video to start at this moment.
I think that most of the tech business ideas are gone. New startups trying to make it into the space today are struggling because the ones that started it all are still the household names.
bull crap
Ride Sharing is the darling example of stupid, business academics who doesn't have an inch of business experience.
Congratulations. Very good content and examples to understand how startups disrupt markets.
we can learn what they teach in famous and expensive MBA schools, free of charge, in 18 min, wherever you are and at any time convenient. I love it.
Are you guys on masterclass? I would love to take a course on this. It's very useful
Take away
1. From customer spective, Identify the worth solving problems in term of money, time, effort
2. Predict competitor response
3. Fall in love with the problems not the AI aka solution. Make sure the worth-solving problems get done