The Financial Times Opinion on BT's results talks about the strategy risking a Kodak moment, in doing so they fail to address the Elephant in the Room. This must be music to the ears of CEO Gavin Patterson.
If the Company is to be turned around, then the job cuts need to be about the closing of businesses that have no future and the loss of 13,000 members of staff is not enough. Global Services is not a business that works and looks more like Carillion than a magic money tree. The idea that BT Vision can get customers to pay more for services that are not core has been proven wrong and thus is now the time to close the business?
Yet these plans were not addressed in the presentation rather short terms issues of investment in Next Generation Investment and statutory requirements for funding Pension requirements where the focus.
If BT Group is to be turned around I do not think that Gavin Patterson is capable of leading the job, and that they need to find talent from outside the company capable of leading the restructure as well as changing the relationship with regulators if the business is to have a future.
Showing posts with label Kodak Moment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kodak Moment. Show all posts
Friday, May 11, 2018
Friday, November 15, 2013
It's not about the technology....
A friend on Twitter pointed me at this article on how Blackberry could have avoided becoming a footnote in business study classes looking at the Kodak Moment.
I am surprised that someone who works for an Advertising Agency fails to point to the obvious factors in Apples success. When none of the others were directly advertising to the consumer on TV, Apple were. When few were advertising handsets in the Press Apple did. Others at that time had stopped advertising above the line because they were selling products via Partners those partners were the Mobile Operators who used the coop funds to pay for in store and brochures which lets face it looks old and out of date compared to Apple.
NOTHING on a iPhone was new to the mobile industry what was fresh was the promotion and development of the aspirational quality of the handset. It has been helped by the "exclusivity" model used by Apple to "limit" mass market appeal. This fashion label allowed Apple for a time to lead the Smartphone market but was quickly overtaken in terms of volume by Samsung who used it's Far East cooperation ethos to appeal to those that where anti-Apple to grab the market.
The big question is will my Grandchildren read that Apple was just another Levis Strauss in that it helped establish a sector, almost died, had a return to fashion and then a slow but inevitable decline?
I am surprised that someone who works for an Advertising Agency fails to point to the obvious factors in Apples success. When none of the others were directly advertising to the consumer on TV, Apple were. When few were advertising handsets in the Press Apple did. Others at that time had stopped advertising above the line because they were selling products via Partners those partners were the Mobile Operators who used the coop funds to pay for in store and brochures which lets face it looks old and out of date compared to Apple.
NOTHING on a iPhone was new to the mobile industry what was fresh was the promotion and development of the aspirational quality of the handset. It has been helped by the "exclusivity" model used by Apple to "limit" mass market appeal. This fashion label allowed Apple for a time to lead the Smartphone market but was quickly overtaken in terms of volume by Samsung who used it's Far East cooperation ethos to appeal to those that where anti-Apple to grab the market.
The big question is will my Grandchildren read that Apple was just another Levis Strauss in that it helped establish a sector, almost died, had a return to fashion and then a slow but inevitable decline?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)