The 2017 tech year-in-review

The year is about to come to an end and I wanted to jot down a few thoughts about some of the events that I have found most significant in the tech and startup spaces over the last 12 months.

(1) Amazon goes brick and mortar

 If there is one major corporate transaction that I would highlight that would be Amazon's $14bn purchase of Whole Foods. We are all well aware of Amazon's clout and how much many of us rely on it for buying and selling stuff. This acquisition is a game changer and, even more importantly, it seems like it is not going to be the last of its kind, as in recent weeks there have been multiple rumors, in particular around French leader Carrefour, about Amazon acquiring in Europe.


As NYU Stern's professor Scott Galloway usually says, Amazon is slashing value out of traditional retailers and is likely to become the first $1tn company in the world.  Interestingly, he also points out how Amazon is a threat for competition and advocates for antitrust action that could easily to breaking the company up in different pieces.

Even in such a scenario, Amazon is a global "darling". Case in point: the beauty pageant / auction launched by Amazon among American cities for the purpose of erecting its second American HQ. An astonishing 238 proposals have been received. Game on.

(2) The crypto hype
As blockchain technology evolves, 2017 will be remembered as the year when cryptocurrencies became a new hot thing in tech. I would not dare say the became mainstream but it is obvious that when your mother asks you what bitcoin is and how she can invest in it, there is something going on. I already blogged about this some months ago.

The main cryptocurrencies (in particular bitcoin and ethereum) have had dramatic price increases (chart below; source: Coinbase), which has led to lots of market debate as to whether we are in a new bubble or if, on the other hand, bitcoin is for instance the new refuge replacing gold. There are arguments and interest of all kinds. From Jamie Dimon's - JPMorgan Chase's CEO - calling people "stupid" for buying bitcoin to the CME Group's launch of bitcoin futures a few weeks ago.

But this crypto frenzy has gone past bitcoin and ethereum. ICO is the acronym of the year and funds raised through this mechanism have exceeded $3bn. We have seen a proliferation of new ethereum-based tokens relying, in many cases, in dubious business models.

I took the time this year to learn a bit about all these topics and decided to invest (ie. gamble) some money in various cryptocurrencies to give this thing a shot. It did not go badly, although I am kind of expecting a short term correction and have therefore cashed in for the most part. In any case, in spite of diverse theories, I'd argue nobody has a real clue about how to value these new assets and how things are going to go down the road.

(3) The Uber crash

Uber has been for years the darling among startups and venture capital investors. Aggressive growth all over the world, increasing valuation round after round, huge losses relying on future market domination...and all of this relying on a "bro-kind-of culture" of work hard play hard.

In 2017 the foundations of Uber became under substantial scrutiny as a result of a very unfortunate  sexual harassment scandal which, rather than an isolated event, proved to be part of the company's culture itself. The whole thing led to CEO Travis Kalanick's resignation and to significant user backlash...and planted the seed for the #MeToo movement - which Time magazine has fairly acknowledged as "person of the year" - that exploded with the whole Harvey Weinstein "plot" .

I am very curious to see how Uber recovers under new CEO Dara Khosrowshahi after having moved into such a slippery slope. Corporate culture matters and now that culture-related scandals are reportedly bringing valuation down, executives will most likely pay more attention to it.

(4) Disney threatens Netflix

Star Wars: Episode VIII premiered in L.A. on December 9 and just a few days later in Europe. But this was not the only surprise that The Walt Disney Company had for us before the year end. On December 14 it was announced that Disney would be acquiring 21st Century Fox film and tv studios for $66bn (including debt) which, among others includes the FX and National Geographic networks, a large additional stake in Hulu and valuable franchises such as Alien and Avatar, or TV shows such as "How I met your mother". A massive move that I expect will change the playing field very significantly in the coming years.

I have thought for a long time that entertainment consumption has changed forever and that TV as we have known it is doomed. Disney has understood this and in the last year they have amassed a ton of content on top of their traditional stuff, including Marvel, the Star Wars franchise. Now it is this bold move.

In the last months there have been rumors about Netflix being a target for Disney. However, this may no longer be the case. After deciding to pull content from Netflix, all points in the direction of launching its own service, either from scratch or on the back of Hulu. If you add sports content (i.e. ESPN) to the mix, we do have a new streaming battle ahead. Watch out Netflix, Amazon.

(5) The advent of fake news

2017 has been the year when fake news have become a major threat globally. It all started at the time of the US presidential election in late 2016. As it has been proven, Russia played a a central part in creating fake news that substantially contributed to changing public perception and generating opinion in favor or Trump. Upon becoming president, Trump started a PR war accusing CNN and others of being fake news. Several examples of this unacceptable activity followed for instance with the French election and, more recently, with the pathetic allegations against Spain's democracy fabricated by the Catalonian pro-independence block (and the likes of Russia and Venezuela) supporters) in their crazy and illegal pursue of independence.

Fake news are a 21st century weapon aimed at bringing down the foundations of democracy as we know it. And it is in this instance that technology companies - in particular Facebook and Google given their size and business models - have a huge responsibility to prevent, or at the very least minimize, fake news from happening. They have the budget, the resources and, increasingly, the technology (e.g AI) to address this. I am hoping that they honor their duty.

It's been an interesting year. I am sure 2018 is going to be a ride, which I am going to have to follow even closer. More to come soon.

Happy holidays!

The digital media battlefield as ad blocking forces are deployed

I like technology, digital trends, the media landscape...and if I had to pick a hot topic affecting all of them lately my choice would be the ad blocking phenomenon. I guess I am a little biased after having worked at an adtech startup for the last 7 months, but still...

It is obvious that since the advent of the internet, traditional media have suffered declining advertising revenues as readers have shifted from paper to digital editions. Publishers have effortlessly (and not always successfully) tried to find business models (subscriptions, diverse freemium schemes, 100% ad-based, etc.) to rebalance their top lines.

Such eagerness to generate increasing digital revenue has in most cases led to a proliferation of advertising at the cost of the user experience. We have reached the point where such ad proliferation has caused many users to find their navigation experience increasingly disturbing, intrussive, annoying...in short, a perfect storm for ad blockers (and an opportunity for new non-intrussive advertising formats).

According to a report by PageFair and Adobe, ad blocking will result in almost $42bn in foregone revenues in 2016 globally (rising from $21bn in 2015). The same report points out double-digit YoY increases in users' ad blocker adoption.

Bad news for publishers as their already somewhat weak digital revenues are impacted by a tidal wave. Obviously, publishers are trying to react by forcing users to disable their ad blockers in order to navigate a site or by kindly asking them to do so...We have just known that, for instance, leading French publishers such as L'Equipe, Le Monde or Le Figaro are pushing together against ad blockers.

This is obviously bad news for advertisers as well. Along these lines, Fast Company reported in January that at the last Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) annual conference, Adblock Plus (one of the leading players worldwide) was kicked out.

It is probably easier said than done but at the end of the day the solution is about finding a balance between revenue and user experience. It sounds obvious, I know. As users, we have to understand that publishers have to pay salaries, premises, technology, etc (like any other business!), and that advertising plays a critical part in that. We cannot demand "free" quality content just like that and we should tolerate some reasonable degree of advertising. At the same time, publishers have to acknowledge that it does not make sense that any given user just wants - in a majority of cases - to close a pop-up as soon as it opens, or skip any pre-roll as soon as it kicks off.

And it is in this context that finding and implementing new advertising formats - native advertising, programmatic technology, etc. - that provide relevant (as opposed to general), quality (as opposed to junk) information to users may be the key to finding that balance. Happy, recurring users mean more traffic which, in turn, should translate in higher revenue. But finding the right formula for this equation is still something in the works.

Netflix as a paradigm...or it's the content, stupid!!

There is no doubt that the significance of content in the media and digital spaces is paramount, and that thousands of reports, articles, books and posts have been written about it. Even major corporate deals have been reportedly completed - Verizon's recent acquisition of AOL is a case in point - on the basis of content. 

Content is king and becoming more and more significant. And when speaking of content, Netflix is one of those names that comes to mind right away. I have had some sort of direct experience about this most recently. 

Netflix, HBONow, Sling, Hulu, Amazon Prime... it is amazing how quickly you can get used to the seamless experience of having all the shows, documentaries and movies (i.e. content) you want within your reach at any time, without neither ads nor schedule constrains. Today, I am all in when it comes to cutting the cable cord. And I was not aware that I felt so strongly about it until circumstances have forced me to change my adopted habits and get back to cable tv.

My entertainment menu while in the U.S. came from over-the-top services such as Netflix, Amazon Prime and, more recently, HBONow. I have digested content like crazy, at my own pace, whenever I have wanted to. However, after landing in Spain I confirmed my fears: none of these services is available in Spain (well, Netflix just announced its forthcoming Spanish launch on October 20, thank god). That has led me to Telefonica's pay-tv offering which, in turn, has quickly discouraged me from watching tv at all. I can't stand the experience, I seldom find interesting content at a time that works for me.

Unfortunately, Spain has traditionally be at the very top in the global piracy rankings, both in relative and absolute terms. It is also often said that this is the result of a country culture. I am not gonna say that the latter is not partially true, but I am also pretty sure that the reality would be a very different one had Netflix or others been around for quite some time. Changing the existing mindset and making people pay monthly to get content is going to take a while.

Speaking of Netflix as a paradigm of good and relevant content, I couldn't help sharing their latest native advertising campaign - Cocainenomics, on the occasion of the premiere of "Narcos" - on the Wall Street Journal. It is jaw-dropping.

Native advertising is a growing trend in digital advertising: it is the practice of making an ad on a platform resemble the look and feel of whatever content the user is there to see or read. This a growing digital advertising segment has been forecasted to be worth $5-10 billion in 2016.  

All experts point out that, in order for native advertising to become the more engaging tool it is for the user, advertisers need to be able to tell stories, to connect with their audience, to address the later's needs. And content - more accurately, the meaningful and quality content - is the secret ingredient that guarantees success, for both publishers (more money) and brands (more brand awareness)...and readers (engagement). 

TV shows: the media turtle

There is little doubt that the internet and technology overall have changed the consumption patterns of media. From cds to Spotify, from the Blockbuster across the street to Netflix, from your weekly tv show to Hulu, from the typical movie at a theater to Avatar, from your free-to-air tv to Boxee. From your local theater or home tv to your laptop. But not only have they changed habits, they have changed - or more accurately, they have forced to change - business models.

I am an avid tv shows fan. But I have a problem: I live in Spain and I think that Spanish tv, on average, sucks. Is it because I have lived for a long time in the country that we identify with the showbiz? Maybe...or maybe not. Perhaps it is just about quality.

I mean this because when I think about how things have changed in the media arena in the last years, I feel like the tv show business  is a turtle surrounded by cheetahs. And I pretty much refer to the fact that it is still treated more as a domestic thing than some of its media brothers and sisters.

There is no doubt that viewers all over the globe value good content, regardless its country of origin. A nice movie, relevant news, an addicting tv show... But at the end of the day the industry treats them in a completely different way. Can anyone think of, for example, Avatar being released in Europe 5 months after it is so in the US? Likewise, probably even more obvious, nobody would see the Superbowl or the NBA Finals a week after they are played. But with tv shows it is a completely different story.

As I was saying, I live in Spain and I can't access Hulu, I can't see the last episode of House on Fox.com, I can't buy episodes on iTunes, I have to suffer the previous season on Spanish tv and see the same old boxes on music stores. It sucks.

Why is it like that? Of course I am aware of distribution rights and so forth. But if the windows for movie releases has just shortened (work needs to be done, though, to take a few more steps ahead), please do the same with tv shows. I hate being unable to share my views simply because I am gonna have to wait for months to catch up with my friends. I strongly believe that a huge development is needed.

 I strongly support the real globalization of the business. If the whole world wears Nikes, Reeboks and a couple of other brands, why isn't it possible for us to consume HBOs and Showtimes? Instead, we are force to consume what we don't like and to look for shady ways (piracy) that damage the business and that makes our experience way less enjoyable. I know it will take time but maybe one day...

Contenido, por favor

Necesito contenido, contenido de calidad, y estoy dispuesto a pagar por el. Problema? No lo hay ni pagando.

Espana es un pais en el que el pirateo de contenidos esta a la orden del dia; de hecho, en terminos absolutos - esto es, no como porcentaje de su poblacion - Espana ocupa el segundo lugar mundial tras China. La gente no esta acostumbrada a pagar por el contenido online y lo normal es "bajarse" la musica y las peliculas. Quien no lo haya hecho, que levante la mano.

Pero obviamente el modelo del "bajarse" no es sostenible...ni legal. Producir contenido cuesta dinero y lo logico es pagar el mismo. Nadie se plantea entrar en la FNAC y "cogerse" un CD o un DVD, pero "bajarse" ese contenido de internet se ve como algo normal.  Y es que al final "bajarse" una peli o una cancion es como robarlo, independientemente de como la gente quiera justificarlo.  

Pero de lo que la industria no se da cuenta es de que no nos ponen las cosas faciles a los usuarios, al menos en Espana. Y no lo digo como justificacion del pirateo. Somos muchos, mas de los que se cree diria yo, que estamos dispuestos a pagar por contenidos de calidad a traves de internet. Lamentablemente, en este sentido, Espana es un islote cibernetico aislado.

Viviendo en Estados Unidos te das cuenta de que la industria se ha puesto las pilas y se adapta a los tiempos. Lo que daria yo por tener a mi alcance servicios como Netflix, Hulu o simplemente las posibilidad de ver en streaming los contenidos de los networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX). Pero ahi estan las limitaciones geograficas impuestas a los contenidos que hacen imposible el acceso universal y las pocas ganas (y las dudas) de la industria de dar pasos hacia adelante. 

Y es que de esta manera, siquiera indirectamente, se fomenta el pirateo pues no se hace sino negar al usuario el acceso a un contenido que sabe que existe... y que lamentablemente solo puede obtener "bajandolo del emule".