Showing posts sorted by date for query asset light. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query asset light. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Sunday, January 21, 2024

How Might AI Reshape Business and Revenue Models?

If artificial intelligence develops as a general purpose technology (we cannot be sure, yet), it might have horizontal and vertical impact on businesses, reorganizing functions and reshaping core business models, as did the internet. 


As has been the trend for software, the internet had a horizontal impact, reorganizing value chains, functions, products, value creation and revenue models across industries. 


Horizontal Impact

Example

Disintermediation: Distribution functions are compressed or eliminated

Travel agents replaced by online booking platforms.

Friction reduced: knowledge and interaction barriers crumble

Open-source software, crowdfunding platforms. Wikipedia

Rise of new business models and industries: Entirely new ways of creating and delivering value emerge.

E-commerce, social media marketing, cloud computing.

Shift from physical to digital products and services: Tangible goods give way to virtual experiences and intangible offerings.

Streaming services replacing physical media, online education platforms.

Death of distance: Businesses can operate across borders almost as easily as within a single market or country

Global e-commerce, social media, messaging, content services, platforms


The vertical impacts affecting industries have been equally dramatic. Think of the emergence of ride sharing, lodging and other “sharing” or “platform” business models built on the internet’s existence. 


Sharing platforms (peer-to-peer networks) disrupt existing industry models because they are “asset light.” Hotels are capital intensive, as are taxi services. But the use of smartphones and private residences and autos to replicate “lodging” and “local transportation” services recasts the role of capital in any industry or business where a sharing platform is possible. 


The sharing network allows a direct peer-to-peer exchange between buyers and sellers. 


The internet also enabled multimedia communications at scale, thus creating the conditions for on-demand digital media to replace all prior forms of electronic and digital media, once broadband internet access was reasonably well available. So content consumption shifts from physical form such as newspapers, magazines and discs to streaming or web delivery. 


So product formats change. So do value propositions. With the emergence of streaming and web access to music, revenue generation in the music business shifted from “selling prer-ecorded copies of music” to “live performance.” Revenue now mostly is earned by performances, not units of pre-recorded music or streaming content purchases. Value now is created by live performance. 


The internet also allowed for customization and individualized experiences, either of form or timing. Users could access “what they want, when they want it.” That is true for mass-produced content such as movies or TV shows or songs as well as for the custom, personal networks of social network “friends” and “following” topics. 


The internet also enabled firms to operate across far-larger markets, both for physical goods and intangible products as well. So distribution networks could be reshaped to support online fulfillment and logistics networks rather than in-store retailing: Amazon instead of shopping at a local retail location. 


Similarly, marketing efforts could be reshaped to use virtual mechanisms rather than physical, targeted and customized based on user search and social media behavior, rather than demographics or psychographics. 


Platform business models are perhaps the clearest example of how an industry can be reimagined. Throughout history, most businesses have operated on a “pipeline” model, where a given product is created, sold and distributed by the owner of that product.


The internet enabled “platforms” where the value is the exchange that matches buyers with sellers, the exchange itself often owning neither the assets sold nor the customer relationships with buyers. 


The revenue model is a fee for arranging the match of buyer and seller. Once the platform reaches sufficient size, other revenue sources, such as subscriptions or advertising, also become feasible. 


Ecosystems often become more important as well. The whole idea behind a “platform” is that it provides increasing value (for tenants, data center operators and retail customers) as more partners, suppliers and features are enabled on the platform. Consider data centers. 


These days, “software” or “digital services” are purchased directly from, or fulfilled by, a cloud-connected data center. 


These days, much of the value of any data center is the other networks, software suppliers, content and application providers that can be connected within any single data center. Some of the value comes from the ability to more easily (cross connect) or quickly (direct peering) exchange data between partners, such as a video streaming network reaching the backbone and local distribution providers of internet access. 


In other cases, proximity makes it easier for suppliers to bundle each others’ services in a more-transparent and simple way for customers who are buying “computing, storage or apps  as a service” from a data center. 


Convenience is another attraction of the ecosystem, as when a single customer is able to purchase multiple large language model, security or enterprise software services at a single location, or from a single computing as a service supplier. 


The point is that AI could have a similar impact, whether it becomes a GPT or not. AI could change the horizontal functions any business or process requires. AI also could reshape particular industries by changing value propositions. Advertising, content, sales, banking and finance are among the obvious areas where AI could add value in the same way that prior data mining has had. 


Consider the many new industries, roles, capabilities and products enabled by the internet, from e-commerce to cloud computing. In fact, some would argue AI itself is enabled by the internet. 


New Industry

Description

E-commerce: Online retail platforms for buying and selling goods and services

Amazon, Etsy, Shopify, Alibaba

Social media: Platforms for creating and sharing user-generated content and building online communities

Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, TikTok

Streaming services: On-demand access to audio and video content

Netflix, Spotify, Hulu, Disney+

Content creation: Blogging, online publishing, influencer marketing

YouTube, Twitch, Substack, Patreon

Cybersecurity: Services and solutions to protect data and systems from cyber attacks

Crowdstrike, Palo Alto Networks, McAfee

Cloud computing: On-demand access to computing resources like servers, storage, and databases

Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud Platform

Fintech: Financial technology services delivered through digital platforms

PayPal, Square, Robinhood, Chime

Gig economy: Online platforms connecting temporary workers with businesses

Uber, Lyft, Airbnb, Deliveroo

E-learning: Online education and training platforms

Coursera, Udemy, Khan Academy, Edmodo

Online gaming: Multiplayer online games and virtual worlds

World of Warcraft, League of Legends, Fortnite, Roblox

Data analytics: Collecting, analyzing, and interpreting data to gain insights

Google Analytics, Tableau, Power BI, Amazon Redshift

Artificial intelligence: Developing and implementing AI models for various applications

Machine learning, natural language processing, computer vision, robotics

Saturday, April 29, 2023

Layer Two Choices Were Also Business Model Choices

Many observers suggest the connectivity industry will have to become more disaggregated in the future. unbundling and exposing many features of a connectivity network and allowing third parties access to those features. 


That is usually presented as a good thing: a chance to increase value; boost revenues and encourage innovation. 


Others might argue that disaggregation--something that has been increasing for at least a couple of decades--has had contradictory effects. Innovation has increased, but arguably mostly by third party apps and firms that now can directly reach users and customers globally (so long as the apps are lawful) without any formal need for a business relationship with a connectivity provider.


One way of illustrating that trend is the “open” way new apps and services are created on IP networks. Since no direct permission is required from the connectivity provider, development by third parties can proceed in a “permissionless” manner. 


Value, on the other hand, has arguably been a negative for connectivity providers: legacy provider gross revenues have dropped; profit margins have been squeezed; average revenue per unit has declined; over-the-top has become the foundation of industry app creation and operation. 


The term “dumb pipe” is a mostly-accurate description of how TCP/IP, virtual machines, containers and software objects are supposed to operate. The physical infrastructure is logically separate from apps that use such networks. 


Docker containerized appliction blue border 2


And many would argue that multiple types of disaggregation have been at work in the connectivity industry, many with negative consequences for connectivity asset perceived value. While observers always argue that “internet access” (connectivity) now is “essential,” those observers also note that connectivity also is increasingly a “basic utility,” akin to electricity, roads, wastewater services, natural gas and other infrastructure. 


Natural utilities are characterized by slow growth but predictable cash flow. Also, using the “separation” model, innovation happens higher up in the functional stack. Electricity providers do not innovate.


Device and appliance manufacturers; software developers and others are the entities that create new products using electricity. In the same way, it is third parties that drive innovation of products that require internet access, not suppliers of electricity. 


The same basic observation can be made of many forms of disaggregation that continue to develop. Most forms of disaggregation have limited connectivity provider ability to control and profit from new and popular apps. 


The one obvious departure is network virtualization, which has the most benefits for connectivity providers in the form of reduced capex and operating costs; lower infra costs and faster network innovation possibilities. 


Trend or development

Impact or change on the industry

Quantitative outcomes

TCP/IP

A  set of networking protocols that enable communication between devices on a network. It is a key enabler of disaggregation because it allows devices to communicate with each other without being tightly coupled.

Applications can run on compliant networks without formal business relationships. Rise of “over the top” application model. 

Use of APIs

Application programming interfaces allow software applications to communicate with each other. They are a key enabler of disaggregation because they allow different software components to be developed and deployed independently.

Creates a possible new revenue stream for connectivity asset owners, driven by OTT app providers, though. Possibly neutral form of disaggregation of apps from physical networks

Wholesale access

Wholesale access is the provision of network access to third-party providers. It is a key enabler of disaggregation because it allows network operators to focus on their core competencies and outsource other aspects of their business.

Increased competition in the market for network services has helped reduce connectivity provider gross revenue and profit margins. 

Sales of cell tower assets

The sale of cell tower assets to independent tower companies is a key enabler of disaggregation because it allows network operators to “focus on their core competencies” and outsource the management and operation of their cell towers.

Reduced capex costs for network operators and a model for further moves towards “asset light” operations. 

Layered software design

Layered software design  divides a software system into layers. Each layer provides a specific service to the layer above it. Layered software design is a key enabler of disaggregation because it allows different software components to be developed and deployed independently.

With TCP/IP, a major driver of value change. App or service owners do not require formal business relationships with connectivity asset owners. 

Kubernetes

Kubernetes is an open-source container orchestration system. It is a key enabler of disaggregation because it allows containers to be deployed and managed across multiple servers.

Increased agility and efficiency in the deployment of applications.

Containers

Containers are a form of virtualization that allows applications to be packaged and deployed in isolated environments. They are a key enabler of disaggregation because they allow applications to be deployed and managed independently of the underlying hardware.

Increased portability and security of applications. Similar impact as “virtual machines.” 

Network Virtualization

Virtualization of whole network functions separates software from the hardware platform.  

Capex and operating costs can be reduced; vendor lock-in can be lowered; faster change is possible. 


Nor is disaggregation or virtualization a terribly new practice. Some might virtualization or disaggregation to the way wholesale networks unbundle some of the parts of the access network: conduits and other passive infrastructure all the way to various combinations of passive and active functions. 


The way modern software is designed, with functional layers, object-oriented programming and containers also are forms of disaggregation and virtualization. The whole point is to enable modular functions. 


So when observers call for connectivity providers to disaggregate, they are calling for a modular, building block approach to monetizing network functions.  


It is fair to point out that the global connectivity industry a couple of decades ago embraced disaggregation of its business model when it decided that Ethernett and TCP/IP were the next-generation network, not asynchronous transfer mode. Ethernet and IP are more open than ATM, by far. 


The main observation is that the argument about disaggregation and virtualization is normally presented as a “good thing” for connectivity service providers. On the contrary, it often has been a “not so good” thing for connectivity provider revenue and profit. 


Disaggregation has allowed third parties to reap most of the rewards of faster innovation and application development. 


All modern connectivity networks these days, from wide area networks to local area networks (Wi-Fi and all others), are built as computer networks. And what is one notable characteristic of computer networks? The data transport can be logically separated from the apps, revenue models and use cases. 


source: IIoT World 


The cost of data transport and networking is lower because of virtualization. Indeed, one argument always advanced for choosing TCP/IP rather than ATM was the vastly-lower cost of IP connectors and devices, compared to the cost of ATM connection alternatives. The argument often was presented as a debate over layer two data link layer protocols. It actually was a debate about value and cost.  


source: Beckhoff 


Basically, the argument between the computing industry and the telecom industry about the “best” next-generation wide area network was won by the computing industry. That Bellhead versus Nethead debate, which raged in the mid-1990s, implicitly involved choices about network architecture, which had implications for network control or freedom.  


The whole existence of the term “over the top” captures the business implications of a decision about layer two networking protocols.


Will AI Fuel a Huge "Services into Products" Shift?

As content streaming has disrupted music, is disrupting video and television, so might AI potentially disrupt industry leaders ranging from ...