Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: axial who wrote (46214)	2/3/2018 2:07:57 AM
From: elmatador	Respond to of 46821

Jim, Business Cases are new device, the US was thought as development by the Technocrats. Eisenhower decided to build the US road network not based on a Business Case. He had the vision. I can picture Kennedy, saying he was going to put a man on the Moon before the end of a decade based on a Business Case. Here is a paper on Technocracy: Notes on Technocracy and Economic Development in the United States and Latin America americo.usal.es WHERE BUSINESS CASES CAME FROM? As the CFO climbed the saddle and started riding the enterprises, along came business cases. The bean counters were relegated to backrooms where they toiled as accountants with piles of paper and mechanical machines. After the 80s and the arrival of Big Three or MBB consultancy companies and all that came with it, With it, the accountants took their revenge. They came out of the backrooms and now if you want to spend a couple of dollars one need a business case. Ridiculous. One has to build a case. I need to argue a case for building something using a single A4 page. I keep arguing that the datacenter geography is wrong and spread along countries that see datacenter geography as a real estate business. I argue the case for bringing content closer to the user and the users distribution is not correlated to where the datacenters are. Luckily, for me, the next billion that need to be connected are distributed along the countries where i have worked: LATAM, APAC, Middle East, Southern Western and Eastern Africa. The US has no infrastructure company that builds 5G. Only Europe and the Chinese do. The only thing that comes closer is Cisco. I argue the case that Cisco has to buy Ericsson for the US to have 5G leverage.

To: axial who wrote (46214)	2/3/2018 2:16:09 AM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

It is the focus on business cases that let lots of money to be taken. It is there for the taken. How? I explain. Companies do not like to address the low revenue high maintenance customers. They want the high revenue low maintenance ones. Companies have high cost structures, They cannot address the low income market, They want the low hanging fruits. Two things changed that: There is new technologies that can serve these markets cost effectively There is a money sloshing around, burning the pockets of the capital holders. Now it is feasible to serve the unconnected. An American person would argue that it is harder than I am thinking. Of course it is! In the US this is not decided by any business case but by the Belt Way lobbysts. Connectivity iof a fight over access to poles. The costs of labor is huge. Down here, it is undeniable that we face much more challenges than an advanced country. Most of it are the lack of the right tripod: TRIPOD: Transport Energy Communications But we compensated with the big advantages: Los costs labor coupled with low cost technologies that appeared and continue to appear.