創業公司怎樣才能“打倒”彭博終端？
|
????彭博終端機在某些企業家和風投家眼里可能有點另類，甚至可能是個已經落伍的東西。在如今這個網絡年代，人人都能從互聯網和開源大數據工具上獲得免費的信息，而彭博終端這個基本上是由第三方數據和分析工具攢在一塊兒的東西居然還好意思跟用戶收錢。另外大家也經常能聽見有人報怨它的界面像80年代的產物。現在包括金融服務業在內的許多行業都在加速“松綁”，但彭博終端機是個典型的“捆綁銷售”產品：它只有一個產品，一個價格，但是它有3000多個功能，這就意味著普通用戶頂多能用上其中的一小部分功能。但是全球有32萬多人每年都花2萬美金使用這個東西。 ????如果你覺得彭博終端面向的市場對于那些有闖勁、有頭腦的創業公司來說是個完美機會，那么你并不是唯一一個有這種想法的人。我曾在彭博創投（Bloomberg Ventures）工作過四年，在那期間以及我離開以后，我曾無數次聽到過關于這個話題的討論。尤其是最近《機構投資人》雜志（Institutional Investor ）上的一篇文章稱，“打倒彭博的競賽已經打響了”，還有一篇單獨的文章特別提到了我在Estimize和Kensho公司的朋友們，稱他們是“瞄準彭博”的創業公司。 ????近年來，彭博終端已經見證了很多潛在競爭者的興衰。不時有新的金融數據創業公司曇花一現，有的高調，有的低調，都試圖挑戰彭博終端的某些功能。不過這些公司最終都很快就消失了，有的關門大吉，有的轉行，還有的被人收購。 ????究竟是為什么？那些做金融數據的創業公司的出路究竟在哪？ ????正面襲擊：祝好運！ ????首先，彭博并不是那種人浮于事的守成型公司。我可能是在彭博創投喝Kool-Aid飲料喝得太多了，但是彭博留給我的印象非常深刻。彭博不久前自己也是一家創業公司，它有一個強大的品牌，雄厚的財力，高度競爭的文化，而且它的這款產品也是花了幾十億美元的研發費用、耗時數年時間才開發出來的。它的技術平臺基本上永遠不會過時，也不會落后，而且背后還有出色的客服團隊在提供支持。 ????但現實中也不乏出色的守成公司被新進者顛覆的例子。因此，說不定有其它原因可以解釋，為什么直到現在創業公司還無法對彭博終端形成威脅。 ????（1）強大的網絡效應的保護。首先，人們經常誤解了彭博終端獲得長期成功的一個重要原因。彭博終端除了數據和分析工具是賣點之外，更主要的是它本身基本上就是一個網絡。實際上它可能還是世界上第一個社交網絡，只不過當年這個詞還沒有誕生。雖然現在有些人認為彭博終端作為一種身份象征的地位已經開始削弱了，但過去幾十年，“彭博機”一直是專業金融人士互相聯絡的利器（無論是工作上的還是非工作上的往來）。在它的目標市場上，可以說大家整天都在用它，通過它與同事、客戶和合作伙伴進行溝通聯絡。而像Facebook、Dropbox、Gmail等基于網絡的服務由于經常被金融服務公司封住，在這方面反而沒有什么建樹——起碼在用電腦溝通方面是這樣的。 |
????In the eye of some entrepreneurs and venture capitalists, the Bloomberg terminal is a bit of an anomaly, perhaps even an anachronism. In the era of free information on the Internet and open source Big Data tools, here's a business that charges its users to access data that it generally obtains from third parties, as well as the tools to analyze it. You'll hear the occasional jab at its interface as reminiscent of the 1980s. And at a time of accelerating "unbundling" across many industries, including financial services, the Bloomberg terminal is the ultimate "bundling" play: One product, one price, which means that that the average user uses only a small percentage of the terminal's 30,000+ functions. Yet, 320,000 people around the world pay about $20,000 a year to use it. ????If you think that this sounds like a perfect opportunity for disruption or "unbundling" at the hand of nimble, aggressive startups, you're not alone. I spent four years at Bloomberg Ventures, and this was a topic that I heard debated countless times before, during and after my tenure there. The most recent example is a recent Institutional Investor article that declared the start of "The Race to Topple Bloomberg," with a separate article highlighting my friends at Estimize and Kensho as startups that "Take Aim at Bloomberg." ????Yet, over the years, the terminal has seen its fair share of would be disruptors come and go. Every now and then, a new wave of financial data startups seems to be appearing, attempting to build businesses that, overtly or not, compete with some parts of the Bloomberg terminal. Soon enough, however, those companies seem to disappear, through failure, pivot or acquisition. ????What gives? And where are the opportunities for financial data startups? ????Frontal assault: good luck ????To start, Bloomberg is not exactly your run-of-the-mill, lazy incumbent. Perhaps I drank too much of the Kool-Aid, but I left the company very impressed. Bloomberg, which was itself a startup not that long ago, comes armed with a powerful brand, deep pockets, a fiercely competitive culture, a product that results from billions of dollars of R&D investment over the years and a technology platform that basically never goes down or even slows down, supported by generally excellent customer service. ????But great incumbents have been disrupted before. So there is perhaps another set of less immediately apparent reasons why the terminal has so far been very resilient to disruption by startups: ????1. It is protected by strong network effects. One surprisingly misunderstood reason to the long term success of the Bloomberg terminal is that, beyond the data and analytics, it is fundamentally a network. In fact, it was probably the first ever social network, long before the term was coined. Although some believe that its cachet as a status symbol is starting to erode, "the Bloomberg" (as it is often called) has been for decades the way you communicate with other finance professionals (for legitimate or not so legitimate reasons). In its relevant target market, everyone is on it and uses it all day to communicate with colleagues, clients and partners. Web-based services (Facebook, Dropbox, Gmail), often banned in financial services companies, haven't made much of a dent in that, at least for desktop communication. |
最新文章