Bitcoin is time delimited and finite whereas gold is finite. If major financial systems were to fail, the values of both would skyrocket, although bitcoin would make a better medium of exchange because of portability, in my opinion.
I wonder what assets are resistant to mass systemic failures arising due to calamities such as war etc.
Bitcoin: without the internet, it would be hard to transact
Fine Art and Gold: hard to carry around
Dollars, land, guns, alcohol?
- i've tried and failed many times at this. Finally, I started an outsourcing company 5group.co. My growth model is to get business from field partners like your self and pay them 20% of the life time of profits from that customer. For example, if someone refers a chat support outsourcing customer and the customer spends 10k usd in a year, we pay out about $1400. We manage the labor/office space etc so the is no capex like in real estate. You do need to have the savvy to generate business though.
-- Prosper marketplace...lend money on prosper and receive 7-8 % - tough if you dont have capital
Completely commoditized service with a few core parterships scattered here and there. Not able to take on the better capitalized players i.e Microsoft, Google, Apple, heck even facebook. Long term odds are not great, unless they merge with a complete ecosystem player like the above
Thanks for taking the time to reply. I might have to disagree on majority of the points you brought up but I appreciate the point of view.
For b], the emphasis is on helping SMEs deploy solutions that are opensource for their current operations, and provide them with ap-ops, tech-ops and general ops labor. I am not thinking of building out new opensource inititatives.
For c] you are completely off point. We are not targeting gamer sor creating a spam system, rather, I would be trying to create a system for lead capture and CCA optimization.
As far as I can tell, google is the only other hyperscale player that is improving geometrically in the general IaaS space. Telecom companies like NTT/Dimension Data and enterprise stallwarts like IBM are taking an application centric approach to public/private/hybrid IaaS as it is hard to match the price and value proposition of the big 3 (who are reducing cost an average of every 6 months on component pricing)
I am sure there will be mergers and aquisitions that see large telecoms buyout smaller niche players to compliment their current offering and gain market share.
Firstly, the hyperscale providers size their VMs differently, so it is generally not an apples to apples comparison.
The best way to compare cloud environment is to consider 3 year cost of ownership, and try to price in various components/elements you might use such as big data stores, VLANs, autoscaling, tiered storage etc.
It is my opinion that the variance in pricing over the long run is no more (or will be no more) than 5% for these hyperscale providers over the long run. So your decision should be based on the type of applications you are trying to build in the cloud. If you are a microsoft "house", then it might make more sense to consider AZURE since they make it easier to port diretory services and licenses to their cloud. Likewise if you are a google house.
Obviously AWS has a lead in the market with regards to tools and functinalities as they were early to the cloud game, but MS and google are catching up fast. My personal choice of IaaS is google cloud because their interface is very easy to understand, but frm a customer support perspective, AWS and AMAZON are far better. Also, AWS and google frequently provide free credits for a period of time so it would make sense to try those out to see what works best.
Your criticism is valid. Believe me, our heart is in the right place - our execution needs to be improved, and I will use feedback such as this to do just that.
I love coffee and our education is ongoing. We will do a better job of better educating our audience.
As for the non-profits, we are on-boarding 5 new non-profits and will present their information on the site soon.