The High Costs of Glamour
"More people have probably become rich building such prosaic businesses as a shoe-polish or a watchmaking company than have become rich through high-tech businesses." - Peter Drucker (Innovation & Entrepreneurship, p. 125)
Over the past few years, I've become keenly aware of the high-costs of glamour. Everybody has a book or screenplay idea, wants to open a retail store, raise money for a high-tech business, etc. The only problem is just that, everybody wants to do it!
Some of the disadvantages of taking the glamour path seem to be:
- Increased Competition. With everybody going for the same goal, people are competing for limited resources. This pushes the margins down for everyone.
- Shake Outs.The success ratio is low. In their hey days, there were over a hundred railroad, automobile, and airplane companies. Now there are only a few.
- Certain Costs Go Up. There may be social pressure to live a high-cost lifestyle and/or the need to work in a metropolitan area, which has a high cost of living. Take education for example. The 'bottom' schools are cheap and fighting for applicants, even ones with great educational opportunities. The high-cost schools are extremely expensive and rejecting people with perfect test scores.
Me. I'd rather find a high-potential niche that nobody knows about, live somewhere cheap, and focus on the customer. That's right. Take it from somebody who lives in New York City and is the founder of a media & education company with focuses on books, speaking, and a high-tech online community.
Posted at
11:00 AM
|
Comments (5)
|
Top
March 18, 2006
Seek First to Fight? Or Seek First to Be Friends? These Are the Questions
The challenge with being the first this or the largest that are:
- There is only one. Or as Randal Pinkett said on the Apprentice, "This show is called, 'The Apprentice', not the 'Apprenti'."
- Defending the number one spot is stressful, not to mention getting there.
- Being #1 brings on jealous criticism and ignorant attacks from others.
- Luck is always a factor. No matter how hard we work or how good we are, we are not protected from chance.
- In the end, being #1 probably doesn't make us feel as good as we thought it would
Despite these disadvantages it is people fighting to be #1 that bring up the quality of play for everyone else. Furthermore, it is the fittest animal surviving that brings on evolution. Is it not better to banish ineffective practices quickly and surely?
I bring this up because I'm still working on philosophically and practically bringing the idea of a competition together with cooperation. Should I take on a posture of doing 'good battle' with competition where the goal is to wipe them out, but where there is a mutual admiration and respect. Or should I focus on cooperation, share information and resources, and see how we could work together or serve different niches. The latter sounds better, but is it better in the end? I know that different situations probably call for different actions, but it is an interesting question nonetheless.
