so why are they selling so cheaply? Are those highly educated and well-educated founder really so stupid? Aren’t they sure about that? Of course not. In fact, founder is not difficult to understand these, they are planning a path to the capital market of the "Sunshine Avenue", first through the financing to get the money, and then burn through low prices to attract customers, increase sales, to finance, and then burn to attract more customers…… Finally, IPO, shareholders out of cash, success." As we all know, the big brothers, Jingdong on the surface is through such a way to make. See the success of the Jingdong, we are envious of heartbeat, I rely on, too simple, not is to burn? Hoodwinked investors, a business model, hard advertising, crazy to do a few years, is also a Jingdong? In fact, the price of Jingdong is really a false, if someone told you the core competitiveness of the Jingdong is low, that he is not a fool is a liar. Not a few people to study Jingdong really true success, every day to meet in their dreams, think success is so simple, leave him so close. The success of Jingdong is due to its better stepping on the right side this is purely luck, the so-called "day time", a strong logistics system, good Internet technology, super financing capabilities, and so on. These things are able to support Jingdong based low survival, while Jingdong to profit can be done at any time, but Liu think it should or should not sacrifice the development speed of expansion, to profit, really to > when the scale is large enough
2. landslide of SONY
in the process of innovation, the failure is almost inevitable. Innovation is a crucial element for any enterprise. But in the process of innovation, failure is almost inevitable. Most products are not successful, most mergers and acquisitions ineffective, most projects astray, and most start-up companies eventually failed. If there is a lack of appropriate structure and operational blueprint to guide the business to change and challenge, then any innovation and entrepreneurial activity will not keep the enterprise alive. The companies listed below do not lack innovation and new business models, but still suffer defeat:
Sun was founded in 1982. Based on the reduced instruction set SPARC processor architecture and a host of excellent software products, Sun has developed the leading servers and workstations, thus becoming the darling of Silicon Valley and gaining prosperity. Sun introduced the Java language in the mid 90s. Java quickly became industry standard and made Sun a market leader. However, the bursting of the "" bubble leads
don’t make electricity supplier "electric injury"
first generation Walkman Walkman entered the U.S. market in 1979 and became an essential tool for American life in 80s, just like today’s iPod, iPad and iPhone. In the field of television, cameras and video camcorders, SONY has become an absolute leader in the market. SONY then began to seek to become an integrated group, involved in the film and music market. However, this led to a decline in SONY’s core product line. In the process of turning SONY and its competitors from hardware to software, smaller companies such as LG, Samsung, Vizio and Apple quickly surpassed SONY and achieved greater innovation.
in 1985, Blockbuster opened its first store in Dallas. The company succeeded in adapting to the market’s transition from video to DVD and quickly became a household name in the United states. However, as Netflix and other small companies launched DVD mail and video on demand services, Blockbuster failed to make rapid changes, while ubiquitous stores turned it into a huge dinosaur". Blockbuster has no choice but to close hundreds of stores, solve debt problems, and follow market changes. Blockbuster’s inability to lead the market at this time. After the failed Blockbuster bid for SK Telecom in South Korea, Dish Network completed its acquisition of Blockbuster, but eventually gave up its plans to transform Blockbuster into a Netflix rival.
two weeks ago, I wrote an article about the electricity supplier "pseudo low cost" blog, for a time caused great repercussions, there are a lot of praise, there are a lot of controversy and different ideas. The most controversial of these is the assumption that the cost of direct production of a shirt at 120 is 78. Some people think this assumption is too high and think the gross profit is too low. In fact, I am very clear, for the direct production cost of retailers under the traditional line of a 120 shirt, certainly not more than 50, with nearly 60% of the gross profit, they will in the whole season, code can sell most of profit, the rest of the season, then sell through broken code gimmick discount. This is their business model. In fact, there’s the difference was that I want to express ideas, traditional business online and offline business in order to compete hard in the price, keep down prices, this is reflected in the inside of the group purchase electricity supplier is more prominent, more vicious competition. Another platform companies sometimes very outrageous, sometimes in order to attract eyeballs, will be lower than the purchase price to sell, this is also explained some wholesalers sometimes buy things sold himself to the electricity supplier.
writer is the founder and President of the treasures of the network, science and Education Group founder Cao Yundong. Originally in the author’s personal blog