Alejandro Suárez Sánchez-Ocaña. Entrepreneur and private investor of the Internet and new technologies sector.
The almighty Google even offered some 3,000 million euros, a final far from Microsoft's bid amount, but it shows that a business must be behind this company, even at a loss. The truth is that both Google to Microsoft, after this operation the stakes: a large number of new users and technology in video calls, which for the opinion of the Internet, is light years ahead of the competition, not least because the technology works PC, Smartphone, and lately even on consoles with internet TVs. The key in my opinion has made Microsoft was launched to the purchase of Skype and widely exceed the offerings of its competitors is Windows Mobile as the operating system designed by Microsoft for smartphones and tablets is alone and its light years competition, Android and iPhone. purchases Microsoft with Windows Mobile gives life to attract millions of users and causing clear synergies, while laying on a mu tessitura and difficult to telecom operators, if they wanted to charge before Microsoft and Google by the use of networks, one of them now owns Skype-a company that makes them lose a lot of revenue and consumes vast resources of red-, a fortiori will study how to apply shortly consumption rates of the users. But Skype , like Twitter and many other com that today only after years of losses involve large investments must have a real attraction to large investment groups continue to maintain their participation fees. An appeal that goes beyond an acquisition end in 3 or 5 years for a large company like Google, Microsoft or Amazon. The logical step for Skype and Twitter is how to monetize those 700 million users move their war to profitable markets, stop thinking only about the end user and start making the leap to the company, where the real business. In corporate communications, Cisco Systems has for years been the king, but they know they can turn the tables in a few months. Do not forget that in the past and tried to acquire Skype and the response was intended to convince Tony Bates, CEO of the corporate business unit of Cisco, that things would go better in the future as CEO of Skype. Tony agreed. Today nobody sees possible to launch an online environment but is directed towards a sector with significant profit potential, unless you are able to attract major advertising campaigns. Free This business model at all, "freemium" is designed to attract users through services for which there is no charge and then convince them to pay for services with more advanced features or membership-only environments. But the client to get used to being "freemium" costs happen to be paid for. For a long time these platforms have provided its users very high, much higher than they should have received grades. Now you can not convince them to pay a monthly fee to have an apparently higher profit. S i understood to be a platform indefinitely subsidize everyone, for 3 or 4 years, it will be almost impossible to turn it into paying users. The business will not be there.
I leave you with the last gallery, published on February 22 in the Journal of Navarra. Also the hype pdf download by clicking here .
As stated by the British newspaper Financial Times, only 10% of the 347,000 million euros allocated by the EU to help its poorer regions have come to be disbursed. In addition, the British weekly said that certain abuses and irregularities in the use of the program. Among some of the irregularities is the money given to big companies like Nokia, IBM, Coca Cola or McDonalds, which were initially aimed at small and medium enterprises.
Given this information I can not but stay stunned: Coca-cola is a medium sized company? I'm sure it was a semantic error committed by the EU. It can not be that European funds earmarked to help SMEs it is carrying one of the world's largest companies, such as Coca-Cola and IBM. Yes, gentlemen. So, then we miss the data provided by the Social Security, according to which, in 2010, 264 companies closed every day in Spain, and the vast majority are not in the construction sector. Sure, if the aid is as bounded and unusual is that you can not even tell with the EU, and less with this type of abuse.
In this type of action is one of the explanations to the continuous increase in the unemployment rate; if all aid is intended for large companies, there is no way to create jobs because there is not. It is time to understand that to create jobs we must begin by encouraging the creation of small and medium enterprises, not continue to promote big business.
But this concept is far from being understood by José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero from the moment that he meets with 35 large Spanish companies, he says, to bring solutions to the crisis. These solutions are the leading adopting from the beginning, with disastrous results, and so it goes. With these actions is demonstrated where the interests are set both by our government and the EU. Indeed, far from creating jobs, and as the Financial Times said, many of these large companies are making use of EU funds to move their factories to countries in the hands of cheaper even though this is expressly forbidden by Brussels work. That is, not only deprive SMEs aid they deserve but large firms use the funds to bypass the laws of the EU to the bullfighter. So create jobs, sure, but apparently did not understand where he had to do and knew that it was forbidden. Know if these data are held by the EU or directly turn a blind eye, but in any case are vandalism and criminal acts. So let me explain why many large companies do not suffer from the crisis. And while the EU and the Spanish government continue to carry this line of action, we will continue looking at unemployment rates, blaming the brick, the Madrid-Barcelona or Carmen de Mairena, which is better.
This text is an article published in El Diario de Navarra and can be read in pdf here
Thousands of netizens have launched from their PC million attacks against the websites of the General Society of Authors and Editors (SGAE), the Ministry of Culture and the label bosses Promusicae, getting them to be inoperative for hours. This attack, say the group of surfers that caused "Anonymous" was a protest against digital canon and is known as the Sinde law, that will haunt the pages download material protected by copyright. Not the first occurrence, but before the media picked up the story not be made in order not to encourage more Internet aunirse aThis group onduct or similar actions.
The debate has been swift among those who accuse cibervandalismo and defending it as a simple and legitimate form of protest. The truth is that the media coverage has caused has been far greater than any aluso act of protest. One of the features of the internet is that information flows with great speed and control over it is very difficult to maintain. Freedom of expression prevails in the network whenever the content of a review does not constitute a crime, therefore acts protest, from this point of view, should be lawful.
Many Internet users use the network to openly express their views on the government and public and private entities, and with the proliferation of social networks, where the citizen exploits its real power. Indeed, too many dates does a great signing American Apparel was forced to not change the logo of your company for the many fans expressed their protests through Facebook, email and Twitter.
But the fact of expressing an opinion on the net about an entity is very different to lock a page because I do not like the content, or what it represents; the boundary is clear and obvious. The living websites advertising and some media should ask themselves if they are to accommodate this type of news or not, what if tomorrow an opinion expressed in a web of a Periodic usta nog this group and below per day worklng this page is blocked by a denial of service attack known as "DoS".
¿Loveríamos as cibervandalismo or as a legitimate form of protest?
The SGAE disliked by many groups, and especially among netizens, and express opinions about their actions it seems lawful and fall within the freedom of expression that characterizes the network. But it turns aggressive, illegal and intellectually weak, express an opinion blocking a website, using aggressive tools anonymously, without showing their faces, and the fact qualify this as a new act of protest similar to demonstrations feet street, "making use of the freedom of speech" is simply nonsense.
We are in a dead spot, which until it enters into force the new penal code these acts do not constitute a crime, and therefore the courts autoridadescomolos can not do much about it. And while we wait to be punishable by law, the content providers are unprotected and can only give our opinion about it, praying that I would not touch me.
The blog of Alejandro Suarez.