The End of Regulation
December 23, 2009
Forbes, which once was a capitalist tool until it suffered a loss in ad pages and fired its library manager, has announced the end of regulation. If the assertion is accurate, will executives carry pistols to meetings? When an idea is challenged, will shots be fired?
The article was “Why Regulation Is Irrelevant”. You will want to read it to make sure the addled goose is not filtering the essence incorrectly. Who wants to read about the end of regulation when sipping a filtered Starbuck’s beverage? These concoctions share more similarities than I first imagined.
For me, the key point of the write up (besides the big ads next to the story) is expressed in this comment:
The problem is that government mediation of market battles almost always produces results that are irrelevant by the time they are implemented. There are three speeds in government regulation: slow, slower and slowest.
To me, fast moving companies just keep moving, sort of like sharks or other predators in popular folklore I suppose.
The key point in the write up was this statement at the end of the article:
What changed that market wasn’t so much government intervention as the creation of cell phones and Internet-based communication.
My hunch is that certain companies will move quickly and rely on disruption to create opportunities. Any suggestions for companies that match this strategic approach?
Stephen E. Arnold, December 23, 2009
A freebie. With the US Federal government shut down, I will disclose the freebie-ness to the Federal Highway authority, an outfit which had an incorrect sign on the GW Parkway when I drove home from my office in Crystal City for many years. Great outfit.
Comments
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
