Men and women are more divided than ever. Time to reassess?
Men and women are drifting apart, while media and politics capitalise on a polarised and confused youth.
Houston, we have a problem!
Young men and women are drifting apart.
Two decades ago, young men and women generally shared similar world views. Now, there is a significant divide, with men tending towards conservative positions and women towards liberal ones.
The gap is widening at a worrying speed, as evidenced by herds of angry young men around the world. In South Korea, for example, nearly 80% of men in their 20s say they are discriminated against, leading to the election of an overtly anti-feminist president in 2022.
Political polarisation and extreme positions can be dangerous, as they may lead to violence and totalitarianism.
There are underlying issues that contribute to cause this divide.
Women tend to be more educated than men, with 46% of them holding a tertiary degree vs 35% of their men counterparts in the EU in 2022. In general, better education generates more liberal ideas and vice versa.
Men in the rich world tend to struggle at school, start working earlier and retire later than women, while dying younger. Therefore, better working conditions for women are sometimes seen as unfair.
However, neither the media nor politics aim to address these issues, instead they pour gas on the fire.
Mainstream media has leant âleftâ (far from the left I grew up with and still support), engaging in a daily bombing campaign against âtoxic masculinityâ and supporting a deranged politically-correct rhetoric. Both women and men avidly read these news, further solidifying their extreme positions, becoming more feminist on one hand and angrier on the other. And this is very good for business!
Meanwhile, the real world has gone in the complete opposite direction.
Right-wing and extreme-right-wing parties have massively grown in popularity in recent years. Some are even led by a woman, like Giorgia Meloni in Italy or Marine Le Pen in France. Hard to believe these parties were voted only by men.
Characters like Donald Trump urge angry men (and women) to take the âred pillâ, feeding them with lies and conspiracy theories.
Both sides benefit from and capitalise on the situation.
People with moderate views, who are probably the majority, are left out of the equation.
Being a moderate young(ish) men today is harder than before, as he's frequently scrutinised and doubted. But the irony is that being a young women today is also harder than before!
Today's women often face immense pressure to meet expectations associated with their acquired rights. For instance, they are expected to have a successful career, which is challenging in itself, regardless of gender, while also having children, possibly at least 2.1 to support demographic needs. They are encouraged to freely express their sexuality, yet expected to establish a stable family, likely with a men who is less educated than them, see previous point.
This contradictory message harms our youth.
It leaves them in confusion due to a lack of clear role models. Increasingly, they are dropping out of school and struggling with commitment, while the level of violence rises.
Maybe itâs time to reassess?
â
â
â
â
The Epic battle against Apple reveals awkward details
The Epic battle against Apple continues, and it reveals awkward details about the mobile app market.
The Epic battle against Apple continues, and it reveals awkward details about the mobile app market.
The Timeline so far:
- Summer 2020: Epic Games introduces a direct payment system in its popular game, Fortnite, on iOS and Android, to bypass Appleâs and Googleâs 30% cut on in-app purchases.
- August 13, 2020: In response, Apple and Google remove Fortnite from the App Store and Play Store.
- August 13, 2020: Epic Games files lawsuits against Apple and Google, accusing them of anti-competitive practices and monopolistic behaviour.
- August 17, 2020: Epic Games launches the #FreeFortnite campaign, parodying Apple's famous "1984" advertisement.
- May 3, 2021: The trial between Epic Games and Apple begins.
- September 10, 2021: The judge issues her ruling. Epic loses the case as Apple is not a monopolist, and its 30% commission rate is lawful. Fortnite will remain out of the App Store. However, the ruling also mandates that Apple must allow developers to direct users to external payment methods.
- November 2023: The trial between Epic Games and Google begins.
- December 2023: Epics Games wins against Google; the search giant runs an illegal monopoly with the Play store. However, itâs still unclear what Epic Games exactly won (Epic never sued for monetary damages); the parties are still discussing. But one thing is certain, this victory will pave the way for increased freedom on the Play Store and Android.
- February 16, 2024: The EU introduces its Digital Markets Act (DMA), which was effectively enforced on March 6th. Under this act, Epic Games plans to develop the Epic Games Store as an alternative app marketplace on iOS within the EU. This store will feature third-party apps, Fortnite, and other mobile games owned and affiliated with Epic. It's expected to resemble its existing desktop counterpart, charging a 12% commission to third-party apps. Epic Games applies for and obtains an Apple Developer Program account, needed to build native apps for iOS.
- February 23, 2024: In a long email, Apple asks Epic Games for written assurance that, this time, they will âact in good faithâ and will honour Appleâs terms of service.
- February 23, 2024: Tim Sweeney, Epicâs CEO, personally responds to Apple with a brief statement. â[We are] acting in good faith and will comply with all terms of current and future agreements with Appleâ.
- March 2, 2024: Apple is not happy about Sweeneyâs quick reply and terminates Epicâs developer account.
- March 8, 2024: Following an inquiry from the EU, Apple reinstates Epicâs developer account.
On the one hand, Apple owns the hardware (the iPhone) and it should be free to manage it how itâs best for the business. Additionally, by maintaining tight control over iOS and the App Store, they can guarantee cyber safety and user privacy.
On the other hand, it's evident they're abusing their dominant position. They ban apps at their discretion, disallow advertising of external payment flows, and prohibit third-party stores.
At the same time, Epic Games is also a leader in its market. Ultimately, their objective is to circumvent Apple's 30% commission to boost their profit margin, not to make the world a better place.
This story isn't only about a legal battle. It uncovers awkward details on how Apple and Google operates in the app market.
Why did Google lose its legal battle against Epic Games while Apple won, even though they were sued for essentially the same reason?
Several factors contribute, but fundamentally, it's due to the market definitions used by the judges in the trials. For Apple, the market was defined as "digital mobile gaming transactions," where Apple isn't a monopolist and faces competition from companies like Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo, who also charge similar commissions on their stores. For Google, the market was defined as "Android app distribution and Android in-app billing services," where Google is the clear monopolist. Bear in mind that Android is an open-source platform.
Some uncomfortable details emerged from the trials.
Google has been making sweetheart deals with the largest apps on its store, notably Spotify and Netflix. Reports indicate that Spotify was permitted to pay 0% fees on the Play Store when using its own payment system, or only 4% (as opposed to the standard 15%) when using Google's payment system.
Netflix was offered a similar deal, but refused and kept subscription payments only available on the web version.
It seems that Google has made great efforts to conceal the details of these deals, even deleting some Google Chat messages from their records. This suggests that more revealing details may have been uncovered otherwise!
Apple reportedly followed this practice as well, offering special treatment to Netflix.
The truth is, without clear regulations and enforcement, big tech companies will continue to employ discriminatory and unfair practices.
Some might argue that as private enterprises, they should be free to conduct business as they wished. However, given their size, the consequences of their actions extend far beyond their target markets. In fact, big tech also serve as strategic, intelligence, and military assets for the governments where they're based, playing a crucial role in global affairs and ultimately on our lives.
It may be time to reconsider the extent of power that a private enterprise can wield.
Stars and Stripes in the Swiss Alps
Forget about local flavour and traditional food.â Vail Resorts owns 40+ resorts across the globe, now also in Europe.
Americans do it bigger!
If you've ever skied in Andermatt, Switzerland, you might have not realised that you were a guest of the Americans. The same would be true if you recently skied in Crans-Montana.
Indeed, both ski resorts are operated by the American giant Vail Resorts.
Forget about local flavour and traditional food.â Vail Resorts owns and operates more than 40 resorts across the US, Canada, Australia, and Switzerland. Their acquisitions of the Andermatt and Crans-Montana ski resorts in March 2022 and November 2023 respectively, marked their entry into the European market.
In Andermatt, they quickly injected millions to upgrade lifts, improve snow-making, enhance hospitality and more.
But more importantly, they included the Swiss resort into their signature international format, the Epic Pass.
With the Epic Pass, skiers can choose to ski at any of the 40+ resorts owned by the company. This allows them to literally follow the snow across continents!
Given that day-passes at American resorts are priced nearly $300, a season Epic Pass costing around $900 looks like a bargain. For a New Yorker, flying 6-7 hours to Zurich or 4 to Colorado plus the driving doesnât make a big difference.
With the number of overnight stays by North Americans quadrupling in the last year, itâs now common to hear Yankee accents on the slopes of Andermatt.
The entry of the Americans has driven up real estate prices, by 12% in the last year, reaching CHF 18-19k per square meter. International companies, such as the Egyptian-Montenegrin-Swiss Orascom Development, are undertaking major real estate projects in the area. Crans-Montana will probably follow suit.
The model of large public companies operating multiple ski resorts is new to Europe.
In fact, most European resorts are managed by local entities. For example, the Dolomiti Superski area in Italy and the Arlberg area in Austria, among the largest of the Alps, are managed by local companies bearing the same name.
An exception is the French Compagnie des Alpes, a public company listed in Paris which operates some of largest ski resorts in France.
Due to climate change, running ski resorts is becoming an expensive endeavour. It requires increasingly larger capital, something Americans donât lack of.
However, this might come at the expense of the local alpine favour, which I believe is essential for an enjoyable ski holiday in Europe.
The unlikely link between the right-wing and Lord of the Rings
What truly unites the global right-wing is not ideology, but rather a denial of reality and a common enemy.
The Economist: Why right-wing Italians love hobbitsâ
Now it all makes sense! I've never been into in fantasy, including The Lord of The Rings or Harry Potter, now I know why.
Right-wing ideologies and populism have gained increasing traction in the western world in recent years. But I would argue that thereâs little ideology in their rhetoric.
Even Benito Mussolini, Italy's dictator in the 1920s and 1930s and a father figure of the Italian right-wing, didn't pursue any specific ideology. He began his political career as a socialist (left-wing), but seized an opportunity on the right and jumped on it. Despite coming from an anti-clerical background, he brokered deals with the church. He also adopted Hitler's anti-Semitism, even though he himself did not fit into the "Aryan" model.
What truly unites the global right-wing is not ideology, but rather a denial of reality and a common enemy.
They like to construct their own reality, filled with conspiracies, underlying narratives, villains and heroes. No wonder they love The Lord of The Rings!
Anyone capable of rationally explaining the current reality is considered an enemy.
They call them âradical-chicâ, the number one villan in the right-wingâs narrative. Enemy number two is usually immigrants, especially those of non-christian backgrounds. Problem is, âradical-chicâ economists and professors are able to explain why immigration is good!
Donât get me wrong, I donât approve the insane wave of left political correctness either, which is also far from reality and actually fuels the right-wingâs resentment.
Understanding reality as it truly is takes time, effort and, unfortunately, money. It may involve traveling and potentially learning new languages to fully comprehend different cultures. It may involve studying at expensive universities. It also requires self-questioning, not easy to accomplish in this society.
These are all things that supporters of Meloni and Trump would rather not do or simply cannot do. Instead, they find comfort in their fantasy worlds populated with dragons and orcs.
Now the question is... what impact will Ai and Virtual Reality have on this?
I donât even want to think about it!
Ai hype and Dot Com bubble: history repeats
High valuations and hype donât always reflect the reality of an industry. Ai frenzy might end like the Dot Com bubble.
History repeats.
NVIDIA is leading the Ai boom of the 2020s, while Cisco was the champion of the internet infrastructure race in the late 1990s.
The fate of Cisco and its peers is well known. Will it happen the same to the Ai industry?â
The Economist has compared the proliferation of Ai apps to the invention of tractors, while the Financial Times likens it to the early days of the internet.
Both tractors and the internet took a long time to replace their predecessors and establish themselves as labor and economic revolutions.
The Dot Com bubble didn't halt the internet; quite the contrary. However, it took at least another decade for today's tech giants to emerge, many of which didn't even exist in 2000.
Same could happen to the Ai industry and its champions.
Today, chips are king. But they quickly become commodities.
Modern chips, currently in high demand, will become cheaper and in large supply in maybe a couple of years, potentially threatening Nvidia's revenue.
The shortages experienced in 2021 and 2022 were promptly fixed, resulting in overcapacity.
Among others, Samsung Semiconductor had to decrease production last year due to a growing chip surplus, while its Japanese counterpart, KIOXIA Group, reported a record loss of $1.7 bn. Meanwhile, global silicon wafer shipments fell 14.3% last year.
Oversupply, fuelled by too much cash too soon, was also at hearth of the Telecom crush in 2000-2002.
High valuations and hype donât always (almost never) reflect the reality of an industry!
Facebook turns 20, but itâs a walking dead. Or, is it?
Is Facebook dead? Definitely not! It remains the most popular social media platform on earth. But it did change a lot.
Facebook turns 20 this year, but itâs a walking dead.
Or, is it?âŠ
Facebook remains the most popular social media app worldwide, with over 3bn active users as of January 2024 (up ~2% YoY), ahead of YouTube and Instagram. Not bad for a walking dead. đ€
However, the social network is dead.
Iâve written before about the switch between social networking and social media, but now something even deeper is happening.
We used to network with our friends and acquittances, then with strangers, eventually with fans. Then we stopped networking all together, spending time on social media mostly for entertainment, consuming content (mostly video) made by professional companies or individual creators, much like TV.
Now, weâre back to networking, but not with humans. Weâre ânetworkingâ with an Ai algorithm.
When we open Facebook or TikTok, weâre talking to an Ai that chooses content for us. It is an Ai algorithm that really chooses how long we should spend on the app, what ads we should watch and what creators we should ânetworkâ with.
However, the need for online social networking remains. According to a Morning Consult study, only 30% of people interviewed said they would share a movie recommendation on social media, behind the 43% who chose text or email and the 35% who opted for group chats. Same happens for news and politics.
This explains the increasing popularity of chat apps. WhatsApp is the third most popular social media app worldwide, Facebook Messenger and Telegram the 7th and 8th respectively, ahead of Snap Inc. and X.
This has massive implication for digital marketing.
On the one hand, marketers need to realise that theyâre not marketing to people anymore, but rather to Ai algorithms, who in turn will talk to real people. Even though some platforms claim they prioritise quality content vs Ai-optimised one (Google search, for example), currently it doesnât seem to be happening much.
On the other hand, marketers need to find other ways to talk to real people. WhatsApp and Instagram channels are good candidates. You wonât get rid of Meta platforms easily!
Many have declared the premature death of Facebook before, even as early as 2009 when The New York Times titled "Facebook Exodus".
Reality is, long live The Facebook!
Social media are more popular than ever and advertising revenue is flowing in. đ€
Meta Ads revenue grew by 16% in 2023 YoY, representing a whopping 98% of total revenue! Net income (after tax) increased by 69% in 2023, at a margin of 29%. đ±
Facebook couldn't have entered its 20s in a better way!
Six Ai tools I use on a daily basis for blogging and marketing
Check out the six Ai tools I use on a daily basis. You won't need anything else!
Six Ai tools I use on a daily basis:
- ChatGPT-4, premium version ($20/month)
This is a must. Virtually any Ai task can be performed with ChatGPT, especially since the launch of custom GPTs.
â - Custom GPTs (part of ChatGPT premium).
I created two custom GPTs that I use on a daily basis:
>> Improve Text (public)
>> Thumbnail Generator (private, for now)
With Improve Text I simply paste a paragraph in the chat and without any prompting it automatically proofreads and improves my text. It generally uses a better grammar and vocabulary. I'm still blown away by the quality of its writing. Nowadays, anything I write goes through that first.
Thumbnail Generator creates two thumbnails for my blog posts. I gave it specific instructions to create images always in a certain size and style. If you check my blog you'll realise that all my thumbnails look similar, as if they were made by the same artist.
It doesn't require complex prompting. A few words are usually enough to obtain a great result. For example, "Netflix wins the streaming war" was the prompt for my latest blog image.
â - âPerplexity Ai (free)
Lately, I find myself searching on Perplexity Ai more than on Google. I use it especially for researching the topics I write about on Linkedin and on my blog.
â - Stable Diffusion (free)
I use its image-to-video generator. It's free, it's quick and generally good quality. Usually, I create images with the Thumbnail Generator, then use Stable Diffusion to create a short animation out of it. Then, I create a GIF that I sometimes post here on Linkedin.
â - âHeyGen ($29/month + add-ons)
I used it to create my own avatar for some work-related videos. I am now exploring also library avatars for more impersonal videos. Excellent quality, easy to use.
â - âMidjourney ($10/month)
This is by far the best image-generation tool (in my opinion), but since I've created my custom GPT, I stopped using it to save money đ.
However, we use it at SMG Swiss Marketplace Group for marketing work.
That's it! Ai doesn't need to be complicated.
Ai will replace human labour, but later than you think
Ai, like the tractor, will take decades to replace human labour. But indeed it will!
When will Ai replace human labour? Probably later than you think.
The Economist compares the introduction of ChatGPT and other Ai applications to the invention of the tractor at the end of the 19th century.
The tractor revolutionised agriculture, allowing farmers to be more productive and efficient. Such improvements contributed to raise American GDP by 8% by the mid-50s.
Yet, it was not an explosive revolution, but rather a slow incremental change.
The chart shows how the tractor took over 50 years to establish itself as a better substitute for horses and mules.
Why?
Essentially, for several decades human and animal labour remained cheaper and more reliable than the tractor.
Early tractors were extremely expensive and still not capable of most farming tasks. On the other hand, labour was cheap and plenty available.
Plus, farms were still not organised to accomodate the tractor in an efficient way. For example, early tractors were most suited to some specific terrains and crops. For all the rest humans and animals were better.
Something very similar is happening with Ai.
Although weâve already been blown away by the capabilities of GPT-4, its real-life applications are still to be proved.
Real wages have hardly risen in the past years, so hiring humans instead of machines will still be more efficient for another while.
It might take decades for Ai to establish itself as a labour revolution. But rest assured, it will happen! Same as with the tractor.
In a conversation with The Economist in Davos, Sam Altman stated that âwhen weâll reach AGI (artificial general intelligence), people will freak out for a couple of weeks and then theyâll go back to their normal livesâ.
In the end, in over one year since the launch of ChatGPT, our lives havenât changed much.
Probably, there wonât be any âboomâ or explosion moment, but rather a gradual yet irreversible change over decades.
â
Ferrari had a record year, topped by the success of the Hollywood movie
Have you seen the Ferrari movie? It was released with perfect timing, right at the close of a record year.
Have you seen the Ferrari movie?
It was released at a perfect timing, right at the close of a record year for the sports car company.
The movie is excellent and provides an accurate portrayal of Emilia, the Italian region where Ferrari is based, and its people. There's even a scene in a restaurant where Enzo Ferrari is served the boiled meat tray, a peculiar speciality of the Emilia region. As an "Emilian" myself, I can confirm its accuracy!
Unfortunately, the movie mainly focuses on racing and a specific episode in Enzo's life, without addressing Ferrari as a luxury car manufacturer.
2023 was a record year at Ferrari. Some facts:
- Car sales were up 3% YoY to 13â663 units.
- Revenue were up 17% to almost 6bn. Ferrari sold higher-priced cars and more personalised features.
- Sales were mostly driven by the new SUV-like Purosangue.
- The average price of a Ferrari car in 2023 was âŹ397â000, a new record!
- Net profit climbed 34% surpassing 1bn for the fist time in its history.
- 10% of revenue came from sponsorship and merchandise. store.ferrari.com sells Ferrari-branded clothing and accessories, from $200 baseball hats to $5000 leather suits. Ferrari is a luxury brand, not just a car maker.
- It is the first luxury group to have eliminated the pay gap between men and women at a global level.
- Lewis Hamilton, one of the most successful F1 drivers in history, will join Ferrari in 2025.
Not bad for a company out of the small town of Maranello, Italy đźđč
Is Netflix the winner of the streaming war?
The streaming war is raging, but Netflix is emerging as the likely winner, with double-digit growth in users and profit.
Is Netflix the winner of the streaming war?
In recent years, traditional studios like Disney with Display+ and Warner Bros. Discovery with HBO Max have entered the streaming industry, significantly intensifying the competition in the space.
The streaming business requires huge investments to produce high-quality original content, which is key to "stealing" users from competitors. But with monthly subscriptions starting from as little as $5, streamers need an exceptionally large user base to turn a profit.
Profit hasnât happened at Disney yet, whose streaming unit lost $420 million in FY23 (down from a loss of 1.4bn the year before). Warner Bros. Discovery does better, finally scoring a profit of $111 million in 2023, up from a loss of $634 million in 2022.
But Netflix does significantly better!
In 2023, it increased users by 13% to 260 million, against a worrying drop the year before. Itâs been consistently profitable for over 15 years, delivering almost 5.5bn net profit (after tax) in 2023 at a net margin of 16%.
On top of successfully cracking down on password sharing and launching an ad-supported subscription tier, Netflix has a secret weapon: content licensing.
Competitors, under pressure to deliver profit, are (re)starting to license their original content to third-parties, including and especially to Netflix. While this generates easy money for the likes of Disney, it also enriches the Netflixâs catalogue, for the delight of its users.
Netflix is so good at servicing its subscribers that when NBCUniversal licensed âSuitsâ in June 2023, the show went straight to the number-one most watched, despite being relatively old (originally aired on cable TV in 2011). In fact, according to Nielsen, in November 2023, nine of the ten most streamed programs were licensed content.
With around $17bn spent on content in 2023, Netflix might reduce this expense while still expanding its catalogue with premium, although old, content.
Beware, this is not reciprocal! According to Netflixâs executives, thereâs more value in acquiring licensed content, than to sell it. So donât expect âOzarkâ to stream anywhere else.
Also, ad revenue is increasing and projected to represent up to 22% of total revenue in 2027. With this, Netflix wonât have to fight for new subscribers, but rather will extract more value from existing users.
If we add to the mix the recent $5bn deal to livestream WWE, we get the perfect recipe to declare Netflix as the winner of the streaming war.
However, streaming remains a costly and hit-driven business. When compared to YouTube, which spends virtually nothing on content, streaming looks way less appealing.
Stay tuned!
â
â
â
â
â
â
Try again with a different filter!