The markets are a buzz at the moment with amateur traders disrupting the status quo and backing some businesses that some of the World’s biggest hedge funds are backing. This sounds like the plot of the next Oscar award winning financial crime movie right? I think so too. Whilst watching events play out on Twitter I remembered the particularly remarkable story of the highly educated Japanese Housewives from the 1990’s who took up currency trading in their spare time and became a force to be reckoned with in the markets. Here is an article telling the stories of these incredible women...

Clubhouse announces plans for creator payments and raises new funding led by Andreessen Horowitz

Clubhouse, an audio based social media app launched year, despite still being in it’s beta phase the business has amassed 2 million users and a valuation of $1 billion. On this short road to 2 million users a conversation about how clubhouse might monetise itself began, the ideas thrown around have ranged from podcast subscriptions to sponsored rooms. In this article we learn more about the revenue model that Clubhouse is choosing to begin with, creator tipping and also about their last funding round which was led by A16z. 

Bumble will list on NASDAS under the ticker ‘BMBL’ this year, founded by Whitney Wolfe Herd in 2014 the dating app which centres around empowering women to make the first move when dating online will make it’s founder the youngest women to be a CEO of a business to list on the market, at age 31. The story of Bumble and it founder intrigues me in equal parts, Wolfe Herd at one point during a video interview attached to the article heard making remarks about the importance of acknowledging how her women empowerment focused business model and operating system needed to have different faces in order to succeed in respective markets. For me this clarity of thought gives me the confidence to believe that Bumble will not only perform well but has the ability to instinctively pivot in order to capture consumers which is some thing I believe to be incredibly important.

Luxury goods stocks are currently reminding some investors of tech stocks in this bloomberg article Algerian Torsoli explains how. There are three charts in this article which are used to help illustrate her observations in a vary clear and an concise manner. If you care about luxury goods take a look at it. It explores how China’s demand is powering European luxury conglomerates despite the lockdown and also how investors are not being discouraged by perfectly priced stocks. I’m posting this article up a few days after it’s release and during the time that has passed LVMH has released it’s Q4 performance in which the strength  conglomerate’s performance comes primarily from the Louis Vuitton brand, I’m curious to see whether Chinese enthusiasm for luxury goods will remain limited to heritage luxury brands.
 

As an Industrial Economics graduate, I tend to get a little giddy when I come across articles, papers, pretty much anything that examines calls into question the behaviour of Titans of industry like Facebook, Amazon and Apple. I believe that the way these companies are being regulated is extremely outdated and needs to be redefined. I came across an amazing paper called the ‘Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox’ written by Lina M. Khan a remarkable American Scholar specialising in antitrust and competition law in the US. The paper argues that the current framework for judging whether Amazon and other conglomerates are behaving competitively is outdated, Khan argues that it isn’t enough to judge a business’ practice by whether or not it is ‘favourable’ to the consumer because well doing so has and will continue to leave massive loopholes for anti competitive practices.
 

This podcasts gives some insights into the new frontier of governments taking on big tech. The industrial economics textbooks are writing themselves at this point, Google is being sue for tacit collusion w/ Facebook they’re being accused of rigging the online ad market ...

I absolutely love it when big tech firms get spicy with one another. One of my favourite spicy incidents - when Samsung paid Apple with truck loads of pennies, the height of pettiness if you ask me. This time round Apple and Facebook are delivering to use some Real Housewives reunion content with their public statements. Here is a taster... 

Apple:  "When invasive tracking is your business model, you tend not to welcome transparency and customer choice."

Facebook: “We hope the DMA will also set boundaries for Apple,"

"Apple controls an entire ecosystem from device to app store and apps, and uses this power to harm developers and consumers, as well as large platforms like Facebook,"
Natalie Massenet’s Imaginary Ventures Raises $160 Million for Second Fund

I have a profound admiration for Natalie Massanet, she stood up against the majority of the luxury fashion industry pioneering it’s  digitalisation. I think Ms Massanet is a visionary and so I follow her moves quite closely. This Bof article talks how the latest fund that Imaginary VC (a vc firm run by Massanet & Nick Brown) have just raised.

There is a thin line between brand infamy and being over exposed, in the early 2000s Burberry felt that it’s brand had crossed that line. It’s tartan print was the official uniform of ‘chavs’  and so the business adopted a strategy to take ownership of its brand image cutting down the inclusion of the tartan to just 10% of it’s clothing. Today luxury fashion houses (depending on their popularity) find themselves over exposed online. Daniel Lee’s  Bottega Veneta, arguably the hottest fashion house of the past two seasons is seeking to address it excessive exposure by coming offline, this Vogue article explores this reasoning why.

I am always excited to see women leading investments vehicles, so when I came across this incredible investment collective founded by three women; Terri Burns (a partner at GV), Lauren Stephanian (a principal at Panthers Capital) and Casey Caruso (an engineer at Google and part time investor at Bessemer) I was in awe. I’m currently fangirling everything from their background story, to their website design and how they explain why they have chosen the firms in their portfolio. This is a collective I’m following closely and I decided to share their website so you too can geek out on their content.

I came across this article on The Fashion Law (a favourite publication of mine) and began to feel quite unsettled by this patent that Amazon are putting in for an algorithm which enhances searches by tracking customer conversations on products and the type of adjectives that the product names are followed by. I think there is a massive privacy issue here. With many questions in regards to the invasive nature of Alexa which has already been documented as ease dropping on people I’m super interesting to see how Amazon’s patented algorithm gets  regulated. I’m also curious to see whether Apple will enable it on iPhones following their “When invasive tracking is your business model, you tend not to welcome transparency and customer choice." comment in relation to Facebook’s tracking practices.

Becoming a Monopoly Was Always Facebook’s Goal :‘Copy, acquire, and kill’

Ever since reading Sarah Frier’s No Filter I have been quite suspicious of Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook’s agenda. In my mind the pair are one in the same with Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Frankenstein’s monster. Dramatic I know but I really think the analogy holds! This article written by Will Oremus  basically puts forward the case (a very compelling one might I add)  that Facebook’s strategy was always to become a monopoly, the evidence is strong. I came away from article thinking that the case for  Facebook being broken up like Standard Oil had been is growing. I also wondered whether a business having such a goal in any way impacts an investor’s decision making process. If I as investor am aware that a business’s strategy for growth is likely to court the sustained attention of regulators am I still inclined to invest? 

There is a lot of talk about whether or not we are in tech bubble, the debate at time seems never ending. So far the actions that speculators have been able to take so har has been (1) buy into these companies (2) sit on the sidelines and evangelise that ‘the end times are coming’ for these startup. Tomio Geron writes about Apeira Capital and it plans to short startups for the WSJ. It’s super interesting and in opinion a really good idea.

UK watchdog plans global revenue fines if Big Tech behaves badly

Excited to see how this plays out. First is regulation on revenue, then ethics and then hopefully fluid interpretation on anticompetitive practices... 

Fun fact, during my masters I developed a business idea for a business venture called FinPurch (a mish mash of the words ‘financing’ & ‘purchasing’) it’s aim was to use financing as a tool to get aspirational millennials and gen-z consumers to increase the size of their average basket, earlier than they traditionally would have. At the time I was developing my business model and operating process Klarna announced their partnership with ASOS, I was quite shocked by the announcement because well I was concerned about the increased possibility for debt (given the consumer profile of ASOS). In this article Klarna’s CEO talks about his own worries about consumer debt, I think the interview aimed to make the business more ‘human’ but to me it felt a bit disingenuous. 
I think this article is amazing, juicy even! As opposed to seeing this article as a unique criticism of venture capital, I think it speaks to the ability of businesses like WeWork, Theranos, Nikola and American Apparel who all had superstar founders/CEOs to manipulate /strong arm investors and board members into supporting their lies and strange behaviours. The driving force in most cases seems to be the promise of supernormal profits, there appears to be an unspoken universal truth that morals/decorum is a fair exchange for 10x  + returns, in the age of increasingly conscientious investing executive boards, VCs and LPs alike have a greater responsibility to make sure that a blind eye isn’t turned towards morally bankrupt behaviour.
Kanye West Signs Multiyear Deal to Sell Yeezy Line at GAP

Kanye West’s Yeezy label is coming to Gap, offering a men’s, women’s and kids line called Yeezy Gap that will hit stores and online next year. This is part of a multiyear partnership that will build on the ‘aesthetic and success’ of the existing Yeezy brand. Given Gap’s struggles turning the business around, the ability to ride on the coat tails of Yeezy’s business valued at $3 billion by BoA is welcome. 

"How Pandemics Fuel the Fall of Small Businesses and the Rise of the Mega Corporation"

This fashion law article examines the relationships between pandemics and the concentration of wealth into the hands of urban entrepreneurs from the 14th century till today. Eleanor Russell (a PhD candidate at University of Cambridge)  and Martin Parker (Professor of Organization Studies at the University of Bristol) put forward the case that the effects of business models, the size of businesses and  adoption of technology are  defining factors in who the winners have been  (during prior pandemics) and will likely be as we emerge from the Covid -19 pandemic. With a special focus on the 'Age of Amazon" this is recommended reading from us at Strategy&Silks.

 

*|Strategy&Silks|*