Brice Timmons

Welcome to the Google Economy

Good analysis, but not entirely correct with regard to "stuff" being bad. The problem with manufacturing, real estate, etc. is the paradigm for viewing what is being sold. Manufacturers should shift into a view of selling the utility of the stuff rather than the stuff itself. Large networks are in a better position to extract residual value from an asset (car, computer, etc.) than individuals. Not to mention, owning stuff doesn't always guarantee you the utility that you need. A car, for example, is generally useful, but many individuals have periodic need of an SUV, truck, van, or some other vehicle that they probably decided to forgo buying when they bought a car. The car retailer that solves this problem by leasing an electric car that comes with the periodic use of an SUV, van, truck, etc. shared among a large network, will boost their sales numbers and be in a position to extract residual value from the car after the lease is up.

Networks of pure information have the bonus of being exceptionally flexible, but there is still a hardware infrastructure underlying every scrap of code in the world. "Stuff" isn't bad, but the centralized, unwieldy networks that disseminate its true value (utility) are inefficient monsters. Franchising everything, possibly even down to manufacturing, (like the note on "linking" above) is the way to go.

Making networks that are able to shed parts and extract residual value after the consumer gets his maximum utility from a product, that's the future of "stuff."