A very successful salesman once told me, “People buy for one of three reasons: need, greed or ego. People who need it can rarely afford it and people with big egos are a pain in the ass. I think you can figure out the rest.”
I just read Zucked by Roger McNamee and realized that the solutions he recommends are far too complex (compared to Facebook’s business model, for example) to effect rapid change and remembered the conversation mentioned previously.
Note: I am NOT saying that McNamee’s ideas are not worth pursuing.
BUT, if we want to change the playing field and give HT a chance, greed may be the solution.
Tech is a big industry but there is one that is bigger, and we need a bigger dog in the fight. More specifically, we need a bigger, greedier dog.
Imagine funding your 401k by surfing the internet. Every click sounds like “Cha-Ching!” Would you use that product?
Now, imagine Fidelity Investments (your 401k provider) as the fiduciary representative for your online data. $3.7 trillion dollars switched teams and are now on your side. Big dog meets bigger, greedier dog. Who’s gonna win that fight? scale vs SCALE.
Of course, the 401k product would require consumer protections–enter the politicians–but it would not be necessary to change big tech’s business model in order to alter the balance of power and restore it to a healthy equilibrium, where HT would have a chance.
Win. Win. Win. Win.
- Consumers win.
- Technology wins (okay, not the ones in Mcnamee’s book.)
- Politicians win.
- The greedy basta…I mean, bankers, on Wallstreet win, again.
We need a better product to beat the products we want to change. More to the point: we (as in I) need a financial product that currently does not exist.
PS. I bought the book two days ago and just finished it so I’ve been thinking about this for exactly two days and would love to hear from people with a more intelligent and informed view than is mine. 