 |
|
|
|||||
When Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak built Apple in a garage, the incumbents they were up against were slow-moving hardware companies. When Jeff Bezos started Amazon, Barnes & Noble wasn’t pouring billions into machine learning or cloud infrastructure. This doesn’t mean that it was easy for these entrepreneurs to change the face of whole industries. It was not. But it was at least possible. Back then, giants could be out-innovated because they were bureaucratic, cautious, and often blind to the potential of what the upstart start-ups were building. The situation is very different today. The startup landscape has changed radically. Where once it was populated by bootstrapping innovators who hoped to build giants from tiny seeds, today many of the most promising opportunities are gobbled up by firms that can deploy billions of dollars in resources long before they start making revenue. Often, these companies are funded by giants themselves, whether thats the enormous PE and VC firms that dominate the Silicon Valley landscape or existing tech hyperscalers, who work hard to ensure that their dominance wont be threatened by some offbeat newcomer. Microsoft, for example, now owns approximately 27% of OpenAI’s newly restructured for-profit entitya share valued at roughly US$135 billionafter investing some US$13.8 billion across the early life of the AI firm. Amazon, meanwhile, has invested $8 billion into the AI startup Anthropic and supported it with extensive infrastructure-building. Not to be left behind, Alphabet has channeled around $3 billion into Anthropic as well. The established giants are also pouring almost unimaginable resources directly into their own innovation efforts. A 2025 report found that five of the biggest US tech companiesAlphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, and Microsoftinvested $227 billion in R&D in 2024, which is more than the US government’s total non-defense R&D budget; indeed, it is more than the annual R&D investments of most countries. {"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/creator-faisalhoque.png","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/faisal-hoque.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"Ready to thrive at the intersection of business, technology, and humanity? ","dek":"Faisal Hoques books, podcast, and his companies give leaders the frameworks and platforms to align purpose, people, process, and techturning disruption into meaningful, lasting progress.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Learn More","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/faisalhoque.com","theme":{"bg":"#02263c","text":"#ffffff","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#ffffff","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#000000"},"imageDesktopId":91420512,"imageMobileId":91420514,"shareable":false,"slug":""}} These investments have predictable effects. Over the last decade, the research output of the big tech companies has dramatically outpaced that of other researchers (typically academics at universities). Crucially, from a commercial perspective, this kind of fundamental research leads to patents that can then be monetized. A recent report from the World Intellectual Property Organization found that large corporations dominate patent applications for AI-related applications and techniques. In contrast to previous times, the giant corporations are now also the disruptorseither directly or through their substantial investments in other companies. These giants are doing deep research, filing patents, and pouring resources into new ventures. An entrepreneur today is not competing with a handful of people with big ideas and small resources. In most major markets, tiny startups now have no choice but to get into the ring to duke it out toe-to-toe with an 800-pound gorilla. The game has changed on a fundamental level. Entrepreneurship today The old assumption was that entrepreneurs could out-innovate big companies, using their small size and agility to pivot twice before the traditional lumbering beasts could even begin to turn. But the statistics show that this assumption no longer holds. Entrepreneurs are not able to out-spend, out-compute, or out-research the giants. Yes, a privileged few entrepreneurstypically those with deep connections in Silicon Valleycan still raise enormous sums and aim to reshape entire industries. But for most founders, that path simply isn’t available. And here’s what often goes unsaid: it doesn’t need to be. You don’t need billions in seed funding or a Rolodex of prominent venture capitalists to build something valuable. What you need is expertise so deep that no one can challenge you. This article is about a different pathone that any entrepreneur can take, whether in tech or far beyond it. The principles here apply to healthcare, construction, professional services, manufacturing, and countless other fields where deep expertise creates real value. The new entrepreneurial opportunity lies not in disrupting entire industries, but in becoming the undisputed authority in a problem space in which your specialized knowledge defines your competitive advantage. This isn’t about slipping under the radar or being too small to notice. It’s about being so specializedso clearly the expertthat you effectively build a moat around your niche. Here are three things that can help entrepreneurs do just that. Become the domain expert The most reliable path to taking ownership of a market niche is simple: become the domain expert. As an expert, you know the vocabulary, you know which problems are just annoying and which are also important. You know the workarounds people use when traditional systems fail and you know the ways in which those systems normally do fail. As a domain expert, you aren’t selling a vision of the future. You are selling the fact that you have spent years in the trenches and you know things that cannot be learned from market research or Google searches or AI queries. You are selling something that differentiates you from the big corporations that cater to mass audiencesexpertise that is both narrow and deep. The kind of expertise that can’t be replicated by a team of generalist engineers, no matter how many resources they throw at the problem. Start Here: Pick one domain you know well and spend a week documenting three problems that matter intensely and that cannot be solved by a generalist solution. Define your specialization ruthlessly Your job isn’t to find the biggest market. It’s to find a market where your expertise gives you an unassailable advantageone in which even well-funded competitors couldn’t match your depth of understanding. So, instead of “I have a vision for transforming healthcare,” it’s “I spent 10 ears as a hospital administrator and I know exactly why the equipment maintenance scheduling system creates safety risks that nobody’s addressing.” Or, instead of “I’m going to disrupt construction,” it’s “I worked on 50 residential job sites and I understand why tool checkout tracking breaks down and costs contractors thousands per project.” A trillion-dollar company is not going to deploy a team of 40 engineers to solve a scheduling quirk faced by 10 mid-sized hospitals. Meta is not spinning up a new product line to solve equipment-tracking failures on residential construction sites. Alphabet isn’t obsessing over the peculiarities of compliance reporting in boutique insurance firms. And even if they did, they couldn’t match the hard-won expertise of someone who has lived these problems for a decade. So you can. Start Here: Write down your idea. Then ask: “Could a well-funded generalist team outcompete me here?” If yes, go deeper into your specialization until the answer is no. Solve the specific problem from end to end Giants build platforms. They build tools. They build solutions designed to work reasonably well for millions of different users with millions of different needs. By necessity, that means they solve problems partiallythey will get their many different customers 70% of the way to a solution and then leave them to figure out the final stretch. As the true expert, you can do something they never will: solve the customers specific problem from end to end. When you’ve spent years living inside a specific domain, you understand not just the obvious pain points but the second-order complications, the upstream causes, the downstream consequences, the workarounds people have layered on top of broken systems. You see the complete picture. That means you can deliver a complete solutionone that doesn’t require your clients to bridge the gap between what the tool does and what they actually need. That depth commands a premium. Clients aren’t paying for a product that they can use to solve a problem; they are paying you for the solution itself, built by someone who understands their reality. Start Here: Think about the problem you solve. What’s the gap between existing solutions and what your clients actually need? That gap is where your expertise livesand where your value lies. You can still win You don’t need venture capital connections. You don’t need billions in seed funding. You don’t need to be in tech. What you need is expertise so deep and specialized that you can own the specialized problems the industry giants cant even see. Instead of trying to disrupt whole industries, the winning move today is to leverage domain expertise so you become the irreplaceable authority in a space so specialized that competition becomes irrelevant. The giants will keep chasing the billion-dollar markets. Let them. Your expertise is your moat and, if you use it correctly, they will never be able to cross it. {"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/creator-faisalhoque.png","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/faisal-hoque.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"Ready to thrive at the intersection of business, technology, and humanity? ","dek":"Faisal Hoques books, podcast, and his companies give leaders the frameworks and platforms to align purpose, people, process, and techturning disruption into meaningful, lasting progress.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Learn More","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/faisalhoque.com","theme":{"bg":"#02263c","text":"#ffffff","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#ffffff","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#000000"},"imageDesktopId":91420512,"imageMobileId":91420514,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
Category:
E-Commerce
Chinas exports rebounded in November after an unexpected contraction the previous month, pushing its trade surplus past $1 trillion for the first time, according to data released Monday. Exports climbed 5.9% from a year earlier in November while imports rose just under 2%. The customs data released on Monday also showed that shipments to the U.S. dropped nearly 29% year-on-year. But as trade with the U.S. weakens, China is diversifying its export markets throughout Southeast Asia, Africa, Europe, and Latin America. China’s exports had contracted just over 1% in October. November’s worldwide exports of $330.3 billion exceeded economists estimates. Imports totaled $218.6 billion for the month. The nearly $1.08 trillion trade surplus for the first 11 months of this year is a record high, surpassing the $992 billion surplus for all of 2024, based on official data compiled by FactSet. A year-long trade truce between China and the U.S. was reached at a meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping in late October in South Korea. The U.S. has lowered its tariffs on China, and China has promised to halt its export controls related to rare earths. Its likely that November exports have yet to fully reflect the tariff cut, which should feed through in the coming months, ING Bank chief economist for Greater China Lynn Song wrote in a report. Chinas factory activity contracted for an eighth straight month in November, according to an official survey, and economists said it was still early to determine whether there was a real rebound in external demand following the U.S.-China trade truce. With exports still going strong, economists generally expect China to meet its target of around 5% annual growth for this year. Chinese leaders outlined a focus on advanced manufacturing for the next five years following a high-level meeting in October. It also highlighted the need to boost domestic consumption, which could help address trade imbalances. A meeting of the ruling Chinese Communist Partys decision-making Politburo was held on Monday, led by Xi, to discuss economic plans for 2026, according to the Xinhua state news agency. It said Chinese leaders reiterated a focus on pursuing progress while ensuring stability.” A readout from Xinhua said China needs to better coordinate its domestic economic work in the face of global trade struggles. Businesses and investors are paying close attention to China’s annual Central Economic Work Conference, which is expected to take place later this month and could map out economic priorities for the next year in more detail. Trade diversification will remain a long-term strategy for China to fight the trade war and manage external exigencies, said Chi Lo, Global Market Strategist at BNP Paribas Asset Management. A stable global trade environment is unlikely to last long, as China-U.S. relations remain in a stalemate despite their temporary trade truce, he said. Still, some economists believe that China will continue to gain export market share in the coming years. Morgan Stanley predicts by 2030, Chinas market share in global exports will reach 16.5%, up from about 15% currently, fueled by its edge in advanced manufacturing and high-growth sectors such as electric vehicles, robotics and batteries. Despite persistent trade tensions, continued protectionism, and G20 economies taking up active industrial policies, we believe China will gain more share in the global goods export market, Morgan Stanley Chief Asia Economist Chetan Ahya said in a recent note. Chan Ho-Him, AP business writer
Category:
E-Commerce
The long battle over control of Warner Bros. Discovery took another turn Monday when Paramount Skydance announced a hostile bid for the entertainment giant, following Warner’s acceptance of a competing offer from Netflix last week. Paramount, which many once deemed the frontrunner in the original bidding war, announced a tender offer that tops the Netflix bid by $2.25 per share, appealing directly to shareholders. That adds another layer of complexity to the deal, which will see a significant consolidation of Hollywood’s power players, no matter who ends up on top. With all the back and forth, it’s easy to have lost track of who’s proposing what. Here’s a rundown of what you need to know. What is Paramount Skydance offering for Warner Bros. Discovery? Monday’s bid, the sixth by Paramount Skydance for Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD), is the same one the company made in the close bidding process, it says. Paramount is offering $30 cash per share to acquire the totality of WBD, including the broadcast and cable networks, the HBO Max streaming service and the company’s extensive catalog. That works out to $18 billion more in cash than the Netflix offer. “We believe our offer will create a stronger Hollywood,” said David Ellison, chairman and CEO of Paramount Skydance in a statement. “It is in the best interests of the creative community, consumers and the movie theater industry. We believe they will benefit from the enhanced competition, higher content spend and theatrical release output, and a greater number of movies in theaters as a result of our proposed transaction.” Who is funding Paramount’s bid for Warner Bros. Discovery? While not mentioned in its press release, Paramount’s SEC filing about its tender offer noted that beyond the money that’s being supplied by the Ellison family, the deal will be partially financed by sovereign wealth funds from Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi and Qatar. In addition, Affinity Partners, the private equity firm led by Jared Kushner, is part of the bid. Paramount said each of those parties “have agreed to forgo any governance rights — including board representation — associated with their non-voting equity investments.” However, having Trump’s son-in-law as part of an offer in a deal where Trump has already said “Ill be involved in that decision” raises several potential conflicts of interest. What was Netflix’s offer for Warner Bros. Discovery? In the Netflix deal, which was announced last Friday, the streamer agreed to pay $27.75 per share for the film studio and streaming divisions of WBD, putting the deal price at $82.7 billion. Netflix’s bid was mostly cash, with some Netflix stock included. Shareholders, under those terms, would receive $23.25 in cash and about $4.50 in Netflix stock per share. WBD, under that deal, would still spin off its TV networks, including CNN and TNT, into a separate company. How long do Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders have to decide which offer to take? Paramount says its offer will expire at 5:00 p.m. ET on Jan. 8, 2026. That could be extended, however, Why did Warner Bros. Discovery choose Netflix’s offer instead of Paramount’s? The announcement of the Netflix deal on Friday talked about complementary strengths and assets, more value for shareholders, and more opportunities for the creative community. You might expect that sort of language in a merger agreement, especially one that faces a tough regulatory fight. With Paramount’s tender offer, though, Paramount will be required to make a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, explaining in further detail why it chose Netflix and rejected Paramount. Prior to the Friday announcement, Ellison, in a leaked letter, discussed what he called a tilted and unfair process in the bidding, suggesting WBD management viewed Netflix more favorably than it did Paramount. Which proposed deal has a better chance of passing review by the Federal Trade Commission? Netflix’s proposed takeover of HBO Max and the WBD catalog had been flagged by several experts as facing an uphill battle in Washington and possibly other parts of the world. On Friday, Trump himselfsaid Netflix also owning HBO Max “could be a problem.” That doesn’t mean the deal would necessarily be stopped, though. There is plenty of time for both sides to make concessions with regulators (a close date hasn’t even been announced). There will be a lot of work, however. Paramount, though, says it would be able to clear regulatory scrutiny quickly. (Larry Ellison, father of CEO David Ellison, is very close with Trump.) “Paramount is highly confident in achieving expeditious regulatory clearance for its proposed offer, as it enhances competition and is pro-consumer, while creating a strong champion for creative talent and consumer choice,” it wrote. “In contrast, the Netflix transaction is predicated on the unrealistic assumption that its anticompetitive combination with WBD, which would entrench its monopoly with a 43% share of global Subscription Video on Demand (SVOD) subscribers, could withstand multiple protracted regulatory challenges across the world.” Will Warner Bros. Discovery films still be released to theaters? The impact of a Netflix-WBD deal on theatrical releases is one of the big unknowns. Netflix would honor commitments previously made by Warner Bros. Discovery, but things are murkier from there as to whether it would release films in theaters before putting them on the streaming service. Paramount Skydance, via David Ellison on CNBC, said it would put 30 movies exclusively in theaters each year.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||