Revolution 4.0 - the Textile Industry

Revolution 4.0 -

the Textile Industry

In post-industrial societies, knowledge is about to become the most valuable commodity of all. And while developed countries continue to lose the low-end jobs in manufacturing which are outsourced to low cost countries, the challenge is how to add value to the economy to remain competitive. An example in the textile industry comes to mind. Before, textile was manufactured in Europe. But today, countries debate themselves between two models: import clothes, or keep a high-value adding textile industries. Keeping the whole supply chain does not seem like an option.

How can we integrate the Fourth Industrial Revolution to the textile industry? In my release "Where No Man Has Gone Before - the Road to the Fourth Industrial Revolution", I take you through a recount of 5000 years of civilizations to understand the crucial moment the World is facing today. The NeXT industries, less capital intensive than before, must integrate to the old industries in order to add value. While manufacturing is automated and outsourced, design must remain in developed countries. 3D Printers can be used today to sketch digital blueprints at almost no cost. Their easy access make it easier for small business to have access to the latest technology to develop rapid prototypes. To cite my release "Nike uses 3D printers to create multi-colored prototypes of shoes. The cost and timing for prototyping has been cut significantly in the last few years. Besides rapid prototyping, 3D printing is also used for rapid manufacturing. Rapid manufacturing is a new method of manufacturing where companies are using 3D printers for short run custom manufacturing".

"The Internet of Things" is another example. Again citing my Release "Where No Man Has Gone Before: the Road to the Fourth Industrial Revolution": "the process starts with the devices themselves, which securely communicate with an Internet of Things platform. This platform integrates the data from many devices, and applies analytics to share the most valuable data with Applications that address industry specific needs". To add value and differiante, brands can add technology to the classical outfit. A chip can be inserted into a training shoe, which in turn sends signals to an iPhone or iWatch that can be used to run reports and analytics. Metrics can help the runners identify their areas of improvements to increase their performance. And help the Brand position itself in the high quality segment, which the final customer is willing to pay for.

For bigger companies, having a strong powerful ERP also helps. The company "Pacific Textiles", headquartered in Hong Kong but with factories in Asia Pacific, uses SAP to achieve the Digital Transformation of it's Fabric Manufacturing. Efficiencies in month-end closing and MRP processes allow to automate a large part of the Supply Chain. By using Data, the company ensures consistency in quality. With Real time reports, decision making process is made agile. SAP HANA ensures a one-service framework which gives Pacific Textiles access to a global network of high qualified IT consultants ready to drive organizational change through software implementation. The aggressive strategy in technologization has helped the company expand globally, focusing on developed countries. 

While the textile industry might be seen by some as a "dying" industry, it represents an excellent example of an industry ready to be reborn. Companies must understand that using the latest technology is not a choice, but a must in order to remain competitive. All that can be automated must be automated, in a transition to "intelligent manufacturing". The low end jobs that must be destroyed should not be protected, as the focus shifts to more value added and more creativity. Companies must manage to differentiate to position their brand in the mind of the consumer and rapidly expand globally. Today, thanks to technology, it is easier than ever. Revolution 4.0 allows easy access to the latest tools to develop your business. There are no excuses. Hop on the Revolution and drive your business to the NeXT level!!!

Cristian Bøhnsdalen
CMO/CFO & Co-Founder @ITRevolusjonen

Tango 2017

Tango 2017

What can be said about the richest country in the world, measured in Natural Resources per inhabitant? How can a country that had the same GDP x cápita as Austria and Italy in the late 1960s go through 30 years of instability, to resurface and go through a new period of stagnation (2012 - 2016)? Argentina is well known for Tango, football and meat. Little is it known that it has a fantastic public education system at University level, and that it houses a world class health system. Human Resources appear as the country's main asset, but are they correctly capitalized? Recent comments from the current Minister of Science and Technology "I am not here to defend the scientists"[1] offer a cloud of doubts. The truth is, the country does not have a long term mentality. Recently elected president Mauricio Macri promised the greatest industrialization plan since the 1960s, where there would not be engineers to cover the job positions. But where is the plan?

Predictions of a 1% growth failed to present a slowdown of -2% GDP in 2016. After a bad economic year, Finance Minister Alfonso Prat-Gay has been recently fired (namely to take the blame for bad economic performance). Some lights for 2016 though:

- The issue with the Vulture Funds was finally arranged, giving the country access to International Capital Markets for the first time since 2001.

- The black market to purchase USD at an unofficial rate (in the same manner as Venezuela) was eliminated, giving room to a normalization of the currency exchange rate.

- Inflation and unemployment figures, previously faked, have been cleaned and are now accurate.

These are not minor issues. They all converge to the normalization of the economy and aim to present a more serious image to attract capital investments. Mauricio Macri expected that investments would pour in very shortly after his election, but this never happened. He forgot, as I always explain, that BEFORE attracting massive investments he must make sure to communicate to the WORLD what it is that Argentina has to offer!!! The goal should be to attract long term genuine capital investment, and not only speculative funds. In my releases "Revolution 4.0 and the Man of Tomorrow - Post-Industrialism, Inequality and the Knowledge Based Economy - Part 2" I name 20 measures that should be taken in Argentina in order to climb up to the top 10 nations over the NeXT 15 years. Quite clearly, Argentina does have the POTENTIAL to clear it... But will the politicians, or society as a whole, understand how to do it? While scientists are treated like garbage and knowledge is not valued, other countries like Singapore, the UK and the US do understand that it is through investment in education, science and technology that the future will be built! Having a great university system is a great thing, but there must be more efforts to connect the world of knowledge, of the ideas, to the private sector. Knowledge must be materialized into value which in turn creates wealth. In that way, societies' great investment in education (through taxes) is actually channeled back to them through job positions, growth and an increase of the standard of living.

In order to attract those desired investments, Mauricio Macri should present a proper strategic industrialization plan. University Students, professors and actors in the private sector should be invited to participate, it is after all THEM who will execute the industrialization plan! Discussions about income tax are futile, the same as the series of adjustments in the National Budget in order to balance Fiscal Deficit which have nothing but launched the country into recession and contributed to a rise in the unemployment rate. Jobs must be created in the private sector in parallel to lay-offs in the public sector, as the economy becomes more dynamic. If anything, Macri has failed in transmitting a VISION of industrialization. It is not clear which NEW industries will be developed, and HOW this will be done! Meanwhile, the economy has lost 200.000 job positions only in 2016. As I always explain, a healthy economy is constantly adding high-value positions to the private sector, the Job Report[2] being the most important indicator of growth. While Macri debates himself in political discussions and quarrels with the Unions it might be that, as the Economist says, that 2017 will prove even more challenging than 2016[3].  

Cristian Bøhnsdalen

CMO/CFO & Co-Founder @ITRevolusjonen

---

[1] http://www.ambito.com/867146-yo-no-estoy-para-defender-a-los-cientificos

[2] http://fortune.com/2016/11/04/october-employment-reports-numbers/

[3] http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21712129-end-reformist-presidents-long-honeymoon-recession-emboldens-argentinas-opposition?zid=305&ah=417bd5664dc76da5d98af4f7a640fd8a

Globalization

Globalization

Globalization[1] is the process by which the markets of different countries become increasingly integrated thanks to the exchange of good, services, technology and capital. Exchanges between people in countries far apart are now fast and simple, thanks to the development of new ways of communication, both virtual and real. A very good example is the film industry: before, films were released in the US and Europe and then cascaded down to undeveloped countries. Today, films are released worldwide simultaneously to avoid illegal copies to eat up a slice of the market share. Globalization depends on economic factors and on social aspects, such as the relationship with other cultures and the dissemination of information. Globalization has changed the way we work. Today, people in countries cooperate to produce and distribute the same goods of services.

What is the effect of globalization? Globalization does not eliminate the inequalities and the distribution of wealth, but it does encourage investments in the less developed areas of the world, and allows poorest countries to find markets in richer ones. Globalization is not a new thing: during the last three Industrial Revolutions, the developments of transport and communications facilitated the launch and integration between the countries. Today, you buy a T-Shirt designed in France but produced in China. Since the 1960s underdeveloped countries have been manufacturing consumer goods for domestic markets but primarily for foreign ones.  

Globalization has had positive effects on the eradication of poverty. Extreme poverty, defined as a condition characterized by severe deprivation of basic human needs, including food, safe drinking water, sanitation facilities, health, shelter, education and information, has been reduced by half in the last 15 years!!! By the year 2030, people living in extreme poverty will drop to less than 400 million. Since the end of WW2, Free Trade agreements and technological advancements mean good and services move around the world more easily than ever. The Mobile Phone, sponsored by our genius Steve Jobs, are the most transformative technology when it comes to the developing world. Phones give people access to banking, and payment systems, better access to education and information. In some places, mobile phones help farmers get information and get the best price for stuff they are producing. International Trade has also created new opportunities for people to sell their products and labor in a global market place.

In a globalized world, the low end jobs are being outsourced to countries where labor is cheap and  regulations are weak (workers rights). In developed nations, consumers get good products at a cheaper price and stockholder get value for their money, but the workers that had those jobs lose them towards jobs overseas. Globalization has fans and detractors. Those who are positive towards it mean that it helps economy to grow by offering more opportunities to workers, which in time puts upward pressure on wages. Those who are negative think that it is not sustainable and has adverse effects on global climate.

According to Swedish economist Hans Rosling[2]: the way globalization is occurring could be much better, but the worst thing is not being part of it. In a fantastic documentary, Hans Rosling shows the advances in life expectancy, income, etc., in the last 200 years. Check it out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo 

The first 3 Industrial Revolutions made countries in Europe move away from the rest. The countries in the West developed more rapidly, while other countries were hindered in their development. Two World Wars had catastrophic effects but also contributed to technological development. Notice however how from the 1970s strong growth in South East Asia (Rise of China), and Latin-America (Brasil), meant accelerated development for developing nations.

Rosling addresses the fact that developing nations have been rapidly catching up with developed nations the last 40 years at a fast and steady pace. He addresses the differences in inequality between nations, but also within Nations!!! He remarks regional inequalities showing the case of China, where Shanghai produces as much as Italy, but Guizhou produces the same as Pakistan, not to mention differences in social classes. We have seen 200 years of remarkable progress, where that huge gap between Western countries and the rest of the world is shortening. Hans Rosling is optimistic and sees a bright future with aid, trade, green technology and peace where it is fully possible that anyone can make it to the wealthier corner.

In developed nations, where people have the luxury of functioning healthcare and education systems, Revolution 4.0, or the Knowledge Based Economy, will offer possibilities for people from lower and middle classes to fight inequality by becoming knowledge experts in their field and turning that into a products or services. Whereas Europe took the lead in the last 3 industrial revolutions, free access to education and resources will shorten the gap even more. Hans Rosling is right in naming that Nations will eventually converge in a long term perspective. He is also right in being optimistic about the future. After all, we are reaching an era of balance and prosperity for the people of Earth.   

Cristian Bøhnsdalen

CMO/CFO & Co-Founder @ITRevolusjonen

---

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalization

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Rosling

Bulls vs. Bears

Bulls vs. Bears

Being Bullish or Bearish in Finance means that you are either optimistic or pessimistic about the current market. Bulls are people who think that a market or a particular stock is going to rise. If investors are bullish about a stock, they will rally behind that stock by investing in it. Bears are individuals who feel that the market and or individual security is going to lose value. Bears investors are going to sell or take a short position in the security or Index that they believe is doomed. Investors shift in and out of bearish or bullish modes based on many factors, including global economic concerns, national economic data and corporate financial performance. These two diverse outlooks create the market. To have a working system we need people willing to buy and people willing to sell. Since bears think their position will lose value, they will sell to mitigate loses. Bulls on the other hand will perceive the same indicators as a good time to buy. And they will pick up what bears are selling, so that they can profit from the outward momentum that is anticipated. Investors can be bullish about a given market, but bearish on a given stock.

So, even with the same indicators, investors can be bearish or bullish about that same market. This has nothing to do with being optimistic or pessimistic, but with expectations. The most difficult for an investor is to eliminate the "bias". Successful investors remain cold even under the worst circumstances, after all financial storms are great buying opportunities. But basic financial theory (and I call it basic, I cannot believe anyone who has been linked to the Finance world has never heard about Bears and Bulls), cannot be so easily applied due to the human factor. Like I mentioned before, even with the same information people can read the data differently.

The fact that a market is going through depression or growth can impacts your stocks, or not. That is when the correlation factor comes in. Direct correlation means that the stock is directly linked to the performance of another indicator. Indirect correlation is quite the opposite, the stock follows the opposite direction. It makes sense, more cars will be sold in a good economic situation. Less cars will be sold in a recession (consumers have less money in their pockets). But some stocks will actually increase price under recessions. It is the case of toilette paper: households will still use it even under the worst crisis.

A country's macroeconomic situation is a good indicator as well. Consider that under recessions investors will sell their stocks, the money flowing to other countries and thus weakening the currency. The opposite will happen in a bullish market: money will flow in, strengthening the currency. This is crucial to consider when purchasing assets: the final outcome must be measured in Hard Currency (for ex, USD or EUR). If you buy a house but the currency devaluated your real earning is liquated. Consider the article: "Unemployment drops to 4,6%, lowest since 2007"[1]: the US has managed to recover from the Financial Crisis in 2008. This was done by applying Keynesian economic theory, which meant printing trillions of dollars in a context of low interest rates to boost job creation (the opposite that Europe did with austerity measures dictated from Berlin, which launched the Euro Zone into the deepest crisis since WW2). Now that the economy is stronger, the interest rate will probably rise making it attractive for investors and thus strengthening the currency (USD). Quite clearly it is a good moment to be bullish on the US as a country, but that doesn't mean that all industries and all companies will grow. Once you selected a bullish market, it is time to do deeper research as to which asset concretely you will make a bet for in that country.

In the article "This country has no government and 3% growth"[2] , we can see how Spain has been growing at a 3% pace the last few months despite political turmoil. After years of crisis the Spanish economy has finally bottomed and is growing. Growth in the economy means more money for consumer spending, which in turn boosts the private sector. However, 5 million unemployed is not an easy number to deal with. Even with strong growth, there must be more effort for social inclusion. And even with growth, not all industries are impacted on the same level. In my article "Successful tech hubs Barcelona"[3] I mention the success case of the city of Barcelona in the Technology field. This has led to it's choice as Mobile World Capital Barcelona[4]. However, it's Start Up Ecosystem has not blossomed as much as Dublin[5]. With a similar tax system, salary range and same religion, clearly culture matters. Spain has a long way to go still in the Technology field, and can take Ireland as example.   

Being bullish or bearish on a given market has nothing to do with the country itself or with it's politicians, but simply with protecting your wallet and your savings. Economy goes in cycles, and as an investor you do want your asset basket to go up in price (again measured in Hard Currency). Check out the following Graph, regarding Bull and Bear markets. In bull markets people enter a sort of euphoria mode. Basing their decisions on social pressure and not being well informed, they go ALL-in. This works for any market, be it stock market, real estate market, etc. When the bull market ends, people start feeling uncomfortable. Sell begins, entering a panic mode. The market eventually finds bottom and starts lifting up again, regaining a more natural course.

Intelligent investors such as Warren Buffet[1], CEO of Berkshire Hathaway and the 3rd richest person in the world after Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos, make their own decisions without being influenced by 3rd parties. Again the situation of the Macroeconomy might be important, but the situation of the stock you are purchasing will be even more. The same for Real Estate. Is buying a house in an upward market enough to earn money? Clearly not. There are many other factors: location, if the house needs to be refurnished, how much financial leverage you got, the interest rate that you need to pay... and what happens if you lose your job and are deep into debt?

In the end, you have to trust you gut, and have balls. Your neighbor, and your own family (or family relatives, if it makes any semantic difference), do not want you to succeed. They want to see you DOWN. They don't want it to go well for you, they are surely jealous. You boss at work will clearly feel the same way. Don't listen to anyone, make your own decisions, and live up to them. YOU and only YOU can find the path to fulfill your Dreams. Choose the right partners, surround yourself with like-minded people, drop the garbage and enjoy life. Believe in yourself,  have FAITH and destiny will take care of the rest!!!

Cristian Bøhnsdalen

CMO/CFO & Co-Founder @ITRevolusjonen

---

[1] http://money.cnn.com/2016/12/02/news/economy/november-jobs-report/index.html?iid=surge-story-summary

[2] http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/06/news/economy/spain-economy-growth-government/

[3] http://itrevolusjonen.com/successful-tech-hubs-barcelona/

[4] http://mobileworldcapital.com/

[5] http://itrevolusjonen.com/successful-tech-hubs-dublin/

[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Buffett

Great Tech Entrepreneurs: A Conclusion

Great Tech Entrepreneurs:

A Conclusion

Steve Jobs (Apple), Bill Gates (Microsoft), Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook), Elon Musk (Tesla Motors, SpaceX, Solar City), Larry Page & Sergey Brin (Google), Steward Butterfield (Slack), Nolan Bushnell (Atari), Evan Williams (Twitter), Jeff Bezos (Amazon), Marc Cuban (Broadcast.com) what do these fantastic personalities in the tech field have in common? Is it genetical? The education, the experience? How can we know what motivates them, what is their driver? Do they even have similar stories? Some things do come to mind though:

- The US has produced the largest amount of millionaires in the last few decades.

- They are all Caucasians[1].

- They all have competitive personalities, they believe in their projects and never quit (or know when to call it quits, something very important as well).

- They belonged to middle-class or well-accomodated families. Nobody started from the bottom-bottom.

- They were all visionaries, and risk takers.

Again, the issue of inequality arises: non-caucasians have a harder time. In Silicon Valley, only 2% of the workforce is African-American[2]. Even having a good education system and equal opportunities does not seem enough. What would be the reason though, is it more difficult for minority groups to open doors, or do they lose hope by not finding representatives, people like them, amongst successful people? That appears as a challenging question, but once more I can conclude that for good or for bad, culture matters. The same could be said about women, there are not that many in the Forbes billionaire list[3] and represent a minority. The business world is mainly dominated by white men.

Consider the changes the world economy is going through. Whereas before Networks and Contacts were important, today their weight is slowly becoming less. The Knowledge Based Economy is opening doors for those who master a specific and unique knowledge, and learn how to capitalize it. Jeff Bezos (Amazon) turned a simple concept like selling books online into a billion dollar business. Larry Page & Sergey Brin (Google) optimized search engines and conquered a market dominated by giants like Yahoo!. Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook) turned a University project into the largest platform to connect with people. Evan Williams (Twitter) differentiated by creating a Media Channel. And Marc Cuban (Broadcast.com) surfed his way to the top by broadcasting online. They seem like simple concepts, easy to replicate, but they are not. Once again, all of them understood the importance of building a Brand and a Business AROUND the main concept. So ideas matter, but not that much. Many of them didn't even have the idea themselves, but they did have to acknowledge or recognize the "idea maker".  

Consider the impact of Entrepreneurship and Wealth Creation in the region as a whole. Having the largest amount of millionaires quite clearly is a huge advantage: they create jobs, they pay their taxes, they drive growth... However, incentives to keep the millionaires in the country must be made as well. It is actually often that the rich move to other countries, be it for lower taxes, easier labor laws, or simply to avoid inspection from the Government. As I mentioned in a previous post, it could be difficult to succeed as an entrepreneur with the Government on your tail.

Successful entrepreneurs are not only economically driven, but that doesn't mean that money doesn't matter. Intelligent entrepreneurs always keep an eye on the Cash Flow. Quantifying the value of a company can be a challenge as well, especially when it comes to the Technology Field which is Knowledge based. Eventually it is best to take similar companies as a benchmark. Google improved what the other Search Engines at the time (Yahoo!, Altavista, etc) where offering, surpassed them and became a billion dollar business. Entrepreneurs are not politically engaged, and look for solutions. Adding value is crucial, as I have explained in my chapter "The 4 Keys to Value Creation"[4]. A successful entrepreneur looks for simple solutions to complex problems. And then of course tries to make a profit out of it. If you don't believe me, check out the following video where our beloved Doc from Back to the Future uses garbage as fuel in the year 2015 (wasn't that LAST year?). Who will come up with the solution to replace fossil fuels? I would make my bet on Elon Musk. And no, where we are going we don't need any roads:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VO4ebmJHFF0

Cristian Bøhnsdalen

CMO/CFO & Co-Founder @ITRevolusjonen

---

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_race

[2] http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/nation-now/2016/02/08/african-american-diversity-tech-leaders-silicon-valley/76616284/

[3] http://www.forbes.com/sites/chasewithorn/2015/03/02/forbes-billionaires-full-list-of-the-500-richest-people-in-the-world-2015/#43c333eb16e3

[4] http://thenobeleconomist.blogspot.no/2016/08/4-keys-to-value-creation.html

Great Tech Entrepreneurs: Mark Cuban

Great Tech Entrepreneurs:

Mark Cuban

Mark Cuban[1] (born July 31, 1958) is an entrepreneur and investor. He is the owner of the National Basketball Association's Dallas Mavericks, Landmark Theatres, and Magnolia Pictures, and is the chairman of the HDTV cable network AXS TV. He is also one of the main "shark" investors on the ABC reality television series, Shark Tank. He graduated from the Kelley School of Business in 1981 with a B.Sc. in Business Administration. At college he had a variety of jobs including bartender, disco dancing instructor, and a party promoter. He also had various business ventures, including a bar, disco lessons, and a chain letter.

In 1982, Cuban moved to Dallas, Texas, where he first found work as a bartender, and then as a salesperson for Your Business Software, one of the earliest PC software retailers in Dallas. He was fired less than a year later, after meeting with a client to procure new business instead of opening the store. Cuban started a company, MicroSolutions, with support from his previous customers from Your Business Software. MicroSolutions was initially a system integrator and software reseller. In 1990, Cuban sold MicroSolutions to CompuServe for $6 million USD. Mark retired for a few years, where he traveled the world and partied as much as he could.

In 1995, he was back in business. A man called Chris Jaeb took his business plan for Audionet.com to Mark Cuban, to made it his own. Cuban brought Jaeb out and together with his partner Todd Wagner and turned the concept into Broadcast.com[2] in 1998. By 1999, Broadcast.com had grown to 330 employees and $13.5 million in revenue for the second quarter. In 1999, Broadcast.com helped launch the first live-streamed Victoria's Secret Fashion Show, which became the most viewed event on the web at the time. That year, during the dot.com boom, Broadcast.com was acquired by Yahoo! for $5.7 billion in Yahoo! stock. For Yahoo!, it was bad business. They had paid overprice and it was difficult to integrate to the core business, not to mention Yahoo! lost focus on it's Search business giving room for Google to blossom.

In January 2000, Mark Cuban buys majority participation in the Dallas Mavericks, a team that had one of the worst performances in the league. He would reorganize everything to print the team a winning mentality. In 2001, he launched a high definition TV Network called HDNet[3], which reached 350.000 homes in it's first year. In 2003 and together with Todd Wagner, he invested into the movie industry, giving him the leverage to release in theaters, DVD and TV simultaneously. In 2011, the Mavericks finally won the Basketball Championship. He then rebranded HDNet, calling it AXS.tv. He achieved major popularity by participating as Investor in the TV Shark Tank[4], where self made millionaires invest their own money in Start-Ups.

Cristian Bøhnsdalen

CMO/CFO & Co-Founder @ITRevolusjonen

---

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Cuban

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadcast.com

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDNet_Movies

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shark_Tank

Great Tech Entrepreneurs: Jeff Bezos

Great Tech Entrepreneurs:

Jeff Bezos

Jeff Bezos[1] (born January 12, 1964) is an American technology entrepreneur, investor, and philanthropist. He is the founder of Amazon[2] which became the world's largest online shopping retailer. An Internet merchant of books and a wide variety of products and services, most recently video streaming and audio streaming, Amazon became the world's largest internet sales website on the World Wide Web. His mother divorced his biological father and married Miguel Bezos, a Cuban immigrant and petroleum engineer, who adopted Jeff. He graduated from Princeton University Suma Cum Laude, with degrees in electrical engineering and computer science. He took a job at DE Shaw, a hedge fund, but he was interested in computer programming. He noticed that the Internet was the NeXT big thing. He noticed there was not a comprehensive catalog for books, and he quit his Wall Street job to create one of the world's first Online bookstores. He had a unique profile, since he had both a finance and business guy. His first investor was none other than his father, who invested not on the company but on his son.

Bezos and his wife established themselves in Washington State, and hired two programmers to code. In 1995, Amazon was launched. The goal was to establish the Amazon Brand and grow the overall business in the E-Commerce segment. As always, earning took time as the capital was reinvested in the business to expand at a fast pace. On May 1997, Amazon went public. The business expanded into a full E-Commerce business including grocery, healthcare, cell phone plans, etc. The dot.com bubble slumped the price of the stock, but in 2002 Bezos bold strategies paid off and Amazon started to bring in a profit.

In 2007, Amazon released the Kindle[3], a device that enabled users to browse, buy, download and read e-books, newspapers, magazines and other digital media via wireless networking to the Kindle Store, a total success. In 2009, Amazon buys Zappos[4] an online shoe and clothing shop in an amazing 1.2 billion USD transaction. However, in January 2010 Apple launched the iPad, a serious competition for the Kindle. Forced to change their business model, Amazon saw an opportunity by empowering authors to self-publish. In 2012, Amazon stepped into the video-streaming industry going head to heads against Netflix. Jeff Bezos is today the 2nd richest person in the world, with a Net worth of 20 billion USD. Amazon is the fastest company ever to reach 100 billion USD in sales. Can you imagine how a what started as a simple book store turned into one of the most lucrative companies of all times? Jeff Bezos and Amazon clearly show us the importance of building a business and a brand AROUND the initial concept, which was simply selling books online.

Cristian Bøhnsdalen

CMO/CFO & Co-Founder @ITRevolusjonen

---

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Bezos

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon.com

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Kindle

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zappos