Hi marginnayan, good example, good start on <<Net result is:>> but more …
<<Operational cost saving for Fidelity for not using 800 number.
It is true that Fidelity incurred huge one time cost to put this online infrastructure in place. But over period of time it will pay for itself.>>
… Fidelity fired a bunch of folks who are no longer needed to man the phones,
<<My time and also company's time is saved, since if I had called the 800 number, probably I would be put on hold for sometime.>>
… You weren’t allowed to keep checking portfolio while working, and now you do,
<<The time Fidelity would have spend serving me can now be used to serve another customer who may feel more comfortable talking to a rep from Fidelity>>
… Fidelity wins, and some other brokerage loses,
<<I can read information about mutual funds online and therefore there is no need for Fidelity to mail me the information about funds. Another cost saving for Fidelity>>
… and the paper mills need fewer workers, in order to compete against other paper mills,
<<Does this not mean in the slightest sense improvement in productivity or efficiency which in one way or other help Fidelity's bottom line and to some extant (my company's bottom line)>>
Productivity is definitely improved, along with efficiency, but not to the extent of allowing equity risk premium to approach that of AAA grade bonds, and not to the extent of underpinning market cap at 135% of GDP (now) or higher (before).
Keep in mind that overall corporate economic profit actually went down, even as reported profit zipped up. Market valuation ought to have some connection with true profit and real free cash flow.
Productivity and efficiency is good for monopolies, but terrible for sub-sections of globalized economy. Internet is ultimately deflationary. We need a follow-up to the abracadabra, and none is in view yet.
Chugs, Jay |
