1. Welcome to DNTrade. If you want to find out about the latest domain name industry news or talk, share, learn, buy, sell, trade or develop domain names - then you've come to the right place. It's a diverse and active community, with domain investors, web developers and online marketers - and it's free! Click here to join now.
    Dismiss Notice

I present to you Aust funniest man.

Discussion in 'General Domain Discussion' started by Billy01, Mar 20, 2012.

  1. Chris.C

    Chris.C Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    2,098
    Likes Received:
    124
    I understand. I would like to clarify that I was speaking from a macro sense, where the individual stories shouldn't sway decision making or judgement.

    If it were my friend or a family member going through that tough time I would definitely empathise and do whatever I could to help even if that meant listening to them pissing and moaning about how unfair the system was.

    If someone wants to commit suicide over losing their job, whilst a tradegy, it is still completely irrational and ridiculous - you can't design systems for that. I'm not saying their "feelings" aren't real, but their negative "perception" of the future as a result of losing their job aren't real. So their friends and family need to be there to make sure they aren't being overly negative and to help reframe their perspective if they are.

    I don't think we should all give up on capitalism and become a socialist country because the odd fruit loop jumps off a building because he "thinks" his life has ended because he lost his retail job.

    :confused:

    As long as competition within the industry is still maintained efficiency gains will be passed onto consumers as businesses will continue to compete for market share and profits via price reductions.

    Don't get me wrong, I think there is a REAL risk that the internet over consolidates industries, ie from my perspective the internet tends to create a winner takes all scenario, ie there is only one major search engine, one major video site, one major social network, one major online store, one major auction house, one major online payment system, etc and I know you all know who each of the above are, but I fear we will see the same effect begin to influence real world businesses as well over the next decade and this could cause some monopoly rent seeking behaviour, but we can cross that bridge when we come to it.

    So I do have a real fear about the limitations of capitalism - but given the alternative options it is still HANDS DOWN the best and fairest model to conduct an economy.

    Apple is one of the finest examples of capitalism out there... yes Apple shareholders have done well, but for Apple to have done so well many consumer tech companies had to go bust as a result of Apple's successes - so not ALL shareholders win - just the winning companies shareholders are overcompensate from an ROE perspective, but they are not overcompensate from a risk perspective given they are in more of high risk winner taks all industry, but ALL of the companies need to be able to raise capital and be funded to facilitate a competitive environment that brings about successes like Apple.

    And I don't know about you but I think it's a small price to pay given that smartphones are freaking amazing! Ten years ago I'd literally have to carry around a large mobile phone, a camera, a laptop, a modem, calculator, a pocket organisers, a discman, a mini TV, etc to achieve what an iphone does very simply 10 years later... You can't tell me the WORLD isn't better off as a result of Apple and the iphone.

    And don't worried Apple taking over the world, as a company they will probably be bust within your lifetime - its a tech company. They almost never last because they almost always move from a model of innovation to replication and rent seeking. Maybe Apple will be an exception, but it probably won't, but we will all definitely be the recipients of the great products they make.

    These articles are written by journalists with a short term mindset who is overly focussed on the "poor American worker".

    I tell you what, Steve Jobs is bloody right - the workers of the emerging world have a work ethic and skills that is just not seen these days in countries like ours.

    I have had half a dozen or so Filipinos and Indians working for me for the last couple of years and they rip strips out of their Australian competition in terms of speed, cost, skill, everything. As a capitalist - it's a no brainer. The best capitalists in the world "at the moment" are now Indian and Chinese - no point arguing about.

    The other day I had a client say they needed XYZ site completed within 5 days to present in a meeting with a major supplier to help close a major deal! I told them they were dreaming, but I'd try - with a lot of hustle and some double time by some of my emerging market contractors 5 days later they had their fully functioning site and content completed!

    Wouldn't have been possible working with an Australian web design firm.

    Emerging market workers rarely complain, their biggest complaint is that they always want more hours (most tell me they'd be happy working 12 hours a day 6 days a week) and I always have to say sorry, I love the commitment, but I'm not willing to work those hours myself and I run the business!

    And don't get me started on what wage they will HAPPILY work for!

    :eek:

    On the flip side, I sent an email yesterday morning to an Australia web design firm who does some work for one of my clients, just asking for a quote to fix up some of the poor design decisions they made when they originally designed the site for $15,000 - I finally got an email from them this afternoon saying they will try and get back to me sometime tomorrow.

    So 48 hours later, the overcharging, mediocre web design firm will LOOK at my email... if they didn't have my client by the balls because they were the original designer of the site and talked them onto an uncommon content management system that they now have everything operating through I'd tell my client to cut them loose ASAP.

    Anyway the point was Steve Jobs is right, the work goes overseas not just because Asia is cheaper, but also because they are BETTER.

    The develop world needs to refind it's lost "work ethic".


    I was ranting on a domain names forum, I didn't realise I was meant to use economic terms.

    :p

    "Efficient markets" is one I would have used, but I think when you talk about the internet and innovation I think you can't skip Joseph Schumpeter's "creative destruction" theory.

    I have one of his most famous books sitting 6 feet behind me "Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy" definitely worth a read.

    :p

    As for making "an argument", I see it more as I'm "stating realities", but everyone is entitled to believe whatever they want to believe.

    :)


    I'm not saying the transition isn't painless and I'm not saying no one is left behind, but we can focus on the couple that are worse off (albeit with their ongoing welfare payments which tend to increase over time anyway) or we can focus on the VAST majority who benefit from not only more economical goods and services freeing up capital which can be allocated elsewhere (including reallocation to welfare payments) but also from the freed up human capital that will go on to solve the higher order problems of the world.

    I know which I prefer to focus on.

    You can think I'm a cold heartless bastard, just because I'm aware of the brutal realities of the world, but I'm know I'm not. I just chose to reinterpret them as positives to be aspired for, because I know what's on the other side, rather than negatives to be feared and avoided.

    That doesn't mean I'm a tyrant, it just means I see the bigger picture. I see what society COULD BE and I want to do everything in my power to help US ALL get there faster. If a few people have to be dragged kicking and screaming to a world of better living standards for all so be it, but don't expect me to join in on the pity party.

    Last time I checked government only "redistributes wealth" it's not in the business of "creating wealth" I haven't spoken to any North Koreans in awhile (they don't get out and about often) but I don't think their communist government is doing well at the "creating wealth" game.

    :D

    So government AT BEST helps eliminate/regulate some market inefficiencies and helps redistribute wealth to allow social harmony, but AT WORST they are a leech on economies that slowly bleeds them to death. They definitely don't create JOBS, ie real VALUE producing jobs, but they can definitely get in the way of job creation.

    I hired an Australian assistant once, I put up with all the bureaucratic BS that went with that for a few months before I decided to offshore everything. Best thing I ever did.

    :rolleyes:

    With all that said, I'd describe the Australian government like this, "utterly crap, but much better than most". So you can look at it either way, most of the time I can't bare to watch the ineptness of politicians, but I'm grateful they are not worse.

    :p

    If you don't like capitalism I hear North Korean or Cuba is good this time of year. Feel free to vote with your feet.

    ;)

    It's the best system we have by miles!

    Also be careful not to confuse capitalism with mistakes of society and government. Capitalism works A LOT better when democracy is functioning well and the general voting population is well informed. The failings of society are rooted in poor governance and an under informed population - that's not capitalism fault.

    I actually blame government - those "poor dumb saps" were busy working hard in their professions. Government should have stopped the sharks (even if well intentioned) from being allowed to advise or sell crap advice or products to Joe Public who didn't know any better.

    :mad:

    That said, society does need to take a good look in the mirror and reflect on how much we ourselves were to blame, most people "allowed themselves" to believe the lies sold to them because they liked "sounds" of the lie that was being sold, even if it was ridiculous, because they didn't want to "hear the reality". So in that sense many were complicit in the lie.

    Most Australian haven't been forced to look in the mirror yet, from a financial perspective, but over the next 5 years they will certainly get their chance, of course as per human instinct they will blame everyone else initially, but the penny will drop, and many will learn their life long lessons hard way, and after a decade or so of tough times we'll be better for the experience.

    +1

    The world has changed but the system is largely the same.

    +1

    +1
     
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2012
  2. Snooks

    Snooks Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    Messages:
    320
    Likes Received:
    2
    The problem with people committing suicide is that their loved ones very rarely see any signs or indications of it coming. :( Its probably better to stick to the econmic side of the discussion unless you have experience in mental health and associated issues.
     
  3. Bacon Farmer

    Bacon Farmer Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    906
    Likes Received:
    540
    Agreed, but don't feel bad, even Gerry Harvey does it occasionally ;-)
     
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2012
  4. Lucas

    Lucas Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2010
    Messages:
    239
    Likes Received:
    5
    +1 What he said!

    Chris you make some good points and I totally agree with you.

    I would be interested to know who here shops at a large local retailer for a pair of shoes that can be purchased for a fraction of the price on the internet from an international retailer for the sole purpose of helping the Australian retail worker?

    The internet has been a big game changer and the times of old are gone. 10 Years ago imagine the hassle if I wanted to buy a battery from China or Taiwan (whoever was making them 10 years ago) - it was just not worth it. I would probably have needed some sort of mail order catalog possibly called them on an expensive monopolised service, sent an expensive telegraphic transfer etc etc. Now we can hop on ebay or wherever and purchase and pay for an item in about 60 seconds then forget about it until it arrives with a knock at the front door a few days later. Thats what I call service. If its cheaper to buy a battery from china for $5 with a $2 postage fee then why should I have to pay someone $25 for exactly the same battery in a local shop. Now thanks to the internet it IS worth buying a $5 battery from a retailer overseas!

    Thinking we can stop it from happening and 'save' retail jobs I think is just deluded. Doesn't mean the transition is going to be easy but the right choices or realities are often not the easy ones. For those of you that thinks Chris is being harsh how many things do you own in your home that were made in China?

    If you are an optimist why not think that those 98,000 people could spend their time much more effectively (on various levels) solving problems that need to be solved or innovating or working in different emerging industries.

    There is a more positive side to the argument also that I think is often overlooked, if the price of goods that people buy online such as shoes, clothing, mp3 players, LCD TVs, smartphones and so on goes down people will have more money to spend on local entertainment, local restaurants, local services etc. Even if the money for these cheaper goods is going overseas, the same money is going overseas anyway even if people purchased it in a local shop - They just don't have to pay the $18 extra because someone wanted to work in a shop all day.

    I am certainly not an economist but I would have thought the whole thing is economics 101. Industries come and go, supply and demand and all that. Like snoopy mentioned we don't see too many chimney sweeps around these days or for that matter blacksmiths? Should we have 'saved' their jobs and turned our back on the innovations of the times that meant they were not needed anymore?
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2012
  5. Lucas

    Lucas Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2010
    Messages:
    239
    Likes Received:
    5
    Plus doesn't it strike people as slightly hypocritical when Gerry Harvey says buying from overseas retailers is risking Australian retail workers their jobs when all he does is buy from overseas then mark up and make a killing? Personally I think what he is really interested in is his bank account, and is just dressing up his concerns as some sort of social injustice that must be stopped. What do you prefer - Australian consumers being ripped off or Australian retail workers losing their jobs?
     
  6. Rhythm

    Rhythm Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,162
    Likes Received:
    118
    Australia's funniest man has to be either:

    David of http://www.27bslash6.com

    Any of the Chaser guys

    or another guy I can't recall the name of.

    Gerry Harvey doesn't even come close.

    :)
     
  7. Billy01

    Billy01 Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    Messages:
    485
    Likes Received:
    1
    Here is a pretty graph for the mentally challenged

    http://www.smh.com.au/business/big-retailers-hammered-20120321-1vkdi.html

    So in 2003 after Mark McInness was flying around the world first class at DJ's expense he decided to close the online store.

    Thats right read the article again "close the online store"

    It reopened in 2009 and is still shit

    These CEO's have no one to blame but themselves.

    They thought the internet (what's that) in OZ would never be a threat.

    This is just ridiculous how can a boom be happening in 1999 and a CEO think this internet thingy will never catch on.

    Employees and shareholders should have a class action over DUD Ceo's (that's a joke by the way)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 22, 2012
  8. Chris.C

    Chris.C Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    2,098
    Likes Received:
    124
    When you own a business (like shareholders do) you get what you "reward" or "reprimand" your employees for (which includes the CEOs).

    Can't blame a CEO for closing a loss making part of the business when his bonuses are paid quarterly or annually, and that divisions was unlikely the become profitable within the next 3 - 5 years a which point he probably wouldn't be there. Sure he shot DJ's in the foot - but his bonus was protected and none of the "owners" had the foresight to "reprimand" him for it.

    It's their own fault.

    I don't understand why people don't expect other people to work in their own self interest when the ongoing relationship isn't guaranteed or even "likely".

    Shareholders and Board of Directors need to have a look in the mirror first.
     
  9. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,364
    Likes Received:
    1,631
    Maybe it should have stayed closed.

    I think one issue that these companies have, David Jones, Harvey Norman. The are typically the most expensive in the marketplace. With high prices, what hope do they really have online when selling generic items?

    Typical example is say TV's, saw one I liked in Harvey Norman, Samsung LED (this was about 6 months ago). If I remember rightly Harvey Norman was about $3800. The lowest online price was $2500. The price is just world's apart and I was shocked at how much Harvey Norman must be making form those walk in type of customer. They had all the $200 Monster cables sitting next to them as well (which they probably pay about $5 for). It's all a cash extraction excercise, nothing wrong with that, but it is terrible deal if you are a consumer.

    So to compete online they'd probably need to sacrifice their brand or call it something else entirely and get a different business model for it. Or charge totally different prices which would probably soon get around. There is no sharp salesman online to convince people that if they spend $4000 on a tv they should waste hundreds more on fancily packaged cables as well.

    I think they'd need a really dramatic shift to do well online. They are probably in for a gradual decline no matter what they do. I'd rather be them than the online guys but I think they are probably in a bit of a "Network Solutions" style situation in terms of growth. Why compete with cheap players when a lot will pay really high prices, even if that market is declining?

    So what do you do, launch some other low price brand? (which is a business model they know nothing about about) whine about it? I don't know, maybe the the whining, make money while you can option is the best choice?
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2012
  10. soj

    soj Founder

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2008
    Messages:
    1,139
    Likes Received:
    13

    :)
     
  11. Chris.C

    Chris.C Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    2,098
    Likes Received:
    124
    Exactly. The problem is you require a bit of a foreward thinking CEO/organisation to execute such a strategy and who recognises that whilst they will be undercutting themselves they are also building business security going foreward.

    The nature of business is if the market demands something, you don't meet that demand, inevitably someone else will. Sometimes the first mover advantage isn't a big deal - sometimes being first secures you the lions share of the market.

    Times be a changing, keep up or get left behind.

    Couldn't help myself.

    :rolleyes:

    I swear there will be no more ranting from me (at least not in this thread)

    ;).
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2012
  12. Billy01

    Billy01 Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    Messages:
    485
    Likes Received:
    1
  13. acheeva

    acheeva Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2011
    Messages:
    327
    Likes Received:
    29
    Property Portfolio

    Hey.....it is not a bad property portfolio

    The tenants always pay on time and never bitch