Category Archives: Business Models

The cost of AI

Posted on by
Reply

A variant on Moore’s law is the observation that the financial capital required to launch a new business decreases exponentially as technology gets cheaper.

Pre-internet, and using a notional geometric scale for the purposes of illustration, you might have needed $5m to found and build a new venture. The World Wide Web probably reduced that to $500k, while cloud computing brought it down to $50k. With the expansion of SaaS and API solutions, that cost might have been $5k to get going. Now, vibe coding and $500 of AI prompts can probably launch a new website, build a back end database, implement an e-commerce solution and deploy agentic AI bots to go and find your first customers.

This is a great outcome if measured by a lower barrier to market entry. It also enables founders to “fail fast, fail cheap”, and incentivises innovation by financially de-risking the process.

But even though the cost of AI tools is extraordinarily cheap in terms of the computing and processing power they deliver, there is a huge cost to our rapid adoption of AI that needs to be accounted for.

First, we are seeing corporate lay-offs among tech firms and parts of the service industry that no longer need as many human bodies and minds to operate at scale. So there is a human, economic and societal cost of increased un(der)employment.

Second, traditional skills and expertise are being hugely reduced in perceived value – why pay a graphic artist to design an image when I can use dall-e for free?

Third, as more and more creative tasks are being outsourced or delegated to AI (“create a short story about an F1 race in the style of Ernest Hemingway”) we risk losing our own innate creativity (that comes with experimentation, curiosity, play and reflection). This in turn devalues the creative process itself (thanks to cheaper, AI-enabled production).

Fourth, AI (and the Large Language Models on which it is trained) has no great respect for intellectual property. It doesn’t recognise boundaries between copyright material, content that is subject to creative commons, content that is in the public domain, and content which is publicly available. Again, if copyright owners and original content creators are not recognised or compensated for their work, why would anyone aspire to creating anything original?

Finally, there is the cost of resources (energy, water, rare earth metals) needed to maintain huge AI processing plants and data centres. (But at least this demand is accelerating the development of renewable energy.)

A few years ago, I posted a blog about the importance of the human factor, in the face of technological progress brought by automation and AI. I still remain cautiously optimistic that AI will bring huge benefits, despite the rampant growth of AI in the three years since I wrote that piece. But we are currently in an awkward and comfortable transition phase. If more jobs are lost to AI, and if human-led output is increasingly devalued, perhaps we will need to revisit the debate about Universal Basic Income and other policies to facilitate this transition.

Next week: Music, music everywhere…. and none of it very memorable 

Cooking the books?

Posted on by
Reply

Over the many years I have been writing this blog, I have often commented on the publishing industry, from my personal experiences, to industry trends and future outlook. The recent collapse of Australia’s online bookseller, Booktopia, prompted me to revisit the topic.

First, a declaration – I am an unsecured retail creditor of Booktopia. Orders for books I  paid for in advance of their publication dates still have not been fulfilled. Obviously, I am not alone; there are about 170k retail creditors, owed a total of $15m. That is an average of about $90 per creditor, although some retail customers are owed more than $10k.

Second, Booktopia’s total debts of around $60m are nearly one third of annual turnover ($198m in FY2023). In FY2022, annual turnover was $240m. Clearly, this was a business in decline, and in financial trouble.

Third, I should have been alert to the problems when I enquired about my outstanding orders, shortly before the administrators were called in. I knew the books had already been published, so I wanted to know when to expect them. This was part of the reply I received, in mid-June:

“We have been experiencing difficulties procuring new stocks from our supplier lately, we are so sorry for the delay.”

Fourth, it transpires that publishers, wholesalers and distributors were experiencing payment delays from Booktopia. Suppliers were reducing or cutting off their credit lines, and declining to supply more stock unless the existing debts were cleared. The administrators are doing their best to realise any remaining value of the business, including a trade sale of Booktopia (as a whole, or as parts). The assets include warehouse stock (some of which may still be owned by the publishers/wholesalers), customer lists, technology, goodwill and other IP. But it was made pretty clear at the first creditors’ meeting that unsecured trade and retail creditors should not expect to get their money back any time soon, and certainly not in full. (A total of $15m in secured debt will get preference, including employees.) So even if the unfulfilled but paid-for stock can be located, there is no apparent obligation for outstanding orders to be completed. In fact, the administrators were suggesting that retail creditors should contact their banks or credit card providers, to see if they could recover their money via those channels. (Which is why insurance premiums, card fees and bank charges go up, of course.)

I don’t understand why Booktopia’s retail and trade debts were allowed to get to such a high percentage of their turn over. Book publishing and distribution shouldn’t be that hard – either the book is in stock at Booktopia, and can be sent immediately, or it is available to order from suppliers and can be fulfilled within a reasonable time. For books that have not yet been printed, surely the customer’s money should be held in some sort of escrow account, and the cash not accessible by the seller or recognised as revenue until the order has been completed?

Of course, books go out of print, and customers may have to wait for a re-print or a new edition. Or the industry needs to consider print-on-demand solutions. Funnily enough, that is one of the key recommendations of the Ad Rem report on the Australian publishing industry (“The Australian Book Industry: Challenges and Opportunities”) in 2001….

Next week: Notes from the UK

 

 

Customer Experience vs Process Design

Posted on by
Reply

Why is customer experience so poor when it comes to process design? Regardless of the product or service, it can be so frustrating when having to deal with on-boarding, product upgrades, billing, payment, account updates and customer service. Banks, telcos, utilities and government services are particularly bad, but I am seeing more and more examples in on-line market places and payment solutions.

Often, it feels like the process design is built entirely according to the providers’ internal operating structures, and not around the customer. The classic example is when customers have to talk to separate sales, product, technical support and finance teams – and none of them talk to each other, and none of them know the full customer or product journey end to end.

Even when you do manage to talk to human beings on the phone, rather than a chat bot, as a customer you have to repeat yourself at every stage in the conversation, and you can end up having to train front line staff on how their products actually work or what the process should be to upgrade a service, pay a bill or trouble-shoot a technical problem.

You get the impression that many customer-facing team members never use their own services, or haven’t been given sufficient training or information to handle customer enquiries, and don’t have adequate authority to resolve customer problems.

On many occasions, I get the customer experience equivalent of “computer says ‘no’…” when it appears impossible to navigate a particular problem. The usual refrain is the “system” means things can only be done a certain way, regardless of the inconvenience to the customer, or the lack of thought that has gone into the “process”.

As I always remind these companies, a “process” is only as good as the people who design, build and operate it – and in blaming the “system” for a particular failing or inadequacy they are in effect criticising their own organisations and their own colleagues.

Next week: App Overload

 

 

Startupbootcamp Sports & EventTech Demo Day 2021

Posted on by
Reply

I have to admire the resilience and perseverance of startup entrepreneurs, who continue to build their businesses in the face of lock-downs, travel restrictions and associated economic challenges. Starting a new business is hard enough at the best of times, let alone during a global pandemic. The latest installment of Startupbootcamp‘s series of virtual Demo Days was another example of how founders and their teams have just knuckled down and got on with the job – this time, in the area of Sports and EventTech.

The 10 startups featured a mix of market places, content creation and distribution platforms, coaching and performance services, and fan engagement. In alphabetical order, they were (links in the names):

Atlas Coaching

Founded by and for women, this is a digital coaching service designed to provide better access to (and feedback from) professional athletes and quality coaches. This is one way to help female athletes offset the costs of being a professional (as well as help pay for their own coaching). A good example where the gig economy meets digital delivery.

CityGuyd

An app that brings AR into sporting events and tourism, to offer an enhanced fan experience and match-day activities, through virtual city guides, which could be presented by professional sport stars who are competing in the event you have come to see. For organisers and venues, the app provides great data on attendees. Offered as a
white label solution plus SDK.

Famecast Media

Designed as an all-in-one content platform, it connects creators and consumers – not just in sport coaching and training, but across music, education, hobbies, well-being and fashion. The founders reckon that creators spend 70-80% of their time on the tech, and only 20-30% on monetizing their content. A huge challenge is that disparate digital tools don’t play nicely together…. The suite of services combines content, streaming, ticketing, branding and merchandising – all built on a commission and revenue share model.

Full Venue

Presenting itself as a data analytics and AI platform for events and venues, the founders see the current pandemic as an opportunity for new business, as economies start to open up and fans want to return to live events. Using AI-based marketing tools, it claims to predict the likelihood of a fan making a purchase (both tickets and merchandising. Again, uses a revenue share model based on a % of the sales generated.

Homefans

This marketplace connects communities of fans who are traveling to attend events and watch live sports, with local fans and supporters. The latter can offer access to local experiences that visitors might not otherwise be aware of. Describing itself as “like Airbnb for Sports Experiences”, the platform takes a 20% commission fee.

PromoShare

Described as a “monetized fan community”, this platform enables organizers and promoters to realize the value of “billions” in unsold tickets for sports, events and concerts. Using primarily word of mouth, fans get to sell unsold tickets on behalf of the events – a form of “social buying”. It integrates into major ticketing platforms, and has proven that fan-generated content can directly lead to ticket sales, by offering the “ambassador” fans access to rewards and other engagement incentives.

refbook

According to the founders, managing sport officials is currently unsophisticated and disconnected, and lacks adequate no digital solutions. This is intended to be an holistic platform to help officials, and leagues co-ordinate, recruit, manage and process payments. With 200+ clients already on-board, the team must be doing something right! (It wasn’t clear from the pitch whether refbook can handle training, certification, accreditation and disciplinary aspects of officiating.)

Row Nation

The only startup here that is directly supported by the relevant sports body, this is a platform for indoor rowing (of which there are apparently 4+ million participants in Australia. Backed by Rowing Australia, it is positioning indoor rowing as a major
e-sport (“like Peloton for rowing”), and a significant part of the digital fitness market. Combining “community, connection, and competition”, at its core is the ability to track and compare personal performance.

SportMatch

A platform the early identification of future sporting talent, which, according to the founders, is currently a slow, sporadic and long-winded process. This solution uses predictive analytics based on measurements and movement, and takes an evidence-based approach to performance data.

SportVot

This is a live steaming service for community-based and grass roots sports and tournaments. The founders claim that only 1% of all sport (in terms of actual participation) is televised, so this is designed to bring access to local sport enabling organizers to broadcast (OTT) their competitions using standard smart phone devices. The platform monetize the content via streaming fees and advertising.

Next week: Same, same – but different?