Yahoo to build the third ecosystem

March 21, 2013

Mobile approaches are the core of ecosystem thinking in today’s digital communication. There are three different approach patterns:

  1. Present winners try to survive (Apple, Samsung, Google)
  2. Our braggart loser is swaggering (Microsoft-Nokia, Motorola-Google, Sony…)
  3. Totally new actor coming to revolutionize the business (Lenovo, Yahoo, Iliad, Fujitsu, Ericsson).

But what are Yahoo’s chances out there?

Picture “Our straight-faced coeval Batwoman, Marissa. Marissa Mayer is the only noble and charming person of the Internet era. She fights for the greater good and better world. View houseofgeekery and J.H. Williams.

Yahoo CEO’s, Marissa Mayer’s, strategy is sharp in its ostensible disharmony. But she knows more than we: Yahoo has a very successful future. But how? This is the order of command:

1. Personnel

Luckily Marissa has started her GRO program at Yahoo. The same would have saved Nokia from Microsoft’s bootcamp. Did anyone read “How to Rescue Nokia“ on the palindromic day 1102-2011 (11th of Feb 2011)?

Marissa’s actions have certain specific goals and reasons.

  • Remote employees don’t need any luxury to stay at home or in cafés “to create a new Yahoo”. Working together means commitment means 10-15 hours per day means quicker results. Yahoo:Remote employees are unefficient.”
  • Today’s old school is a mixture of hipster logic and arrogant stupidity working with Apple products. Like creativity would pop up from Apple gadgetry! No, best companies don’t fool with hard work.
  • Yahoo needs to get rid of 30 % of present staff and replace them with 500 talented persons only (like Risku’s GRO Program at Nokia). The only possible procedure is Marissa’s “Paperwork”. It means that the recruitment process is up and running and most of the bimbos “are occupied”. So two moron groups are eliminated. Now we have time to combine three ongoing flows: Get Rid Of GRO + Talent Screening TAS + Nomination into Programs NIPGRO+TAS+NIP is a formula which ensures quickest simultaneous method to slim and refresh Yahoo.

2. Business focus

Yahoo’s business focus has been built during the “Mosaic and Floppy Disk Era” of the Internet. In search and advertisement businesses there is nothing for Yahoo anymore. Marissa knows it and she is a brisk wind for the future:

  • Yahoo has beenThe Portal Porn Shop” (weight on words Web Portal and its PixelPorn). Now it tries “personalization across content and ads PACA”. Marissa knows that under those magic words there are no business opportunities for Yahoo. Therefore the PACA strategy is just to bluff competitors and the media (Marissa bluffing the media). The real business opportunities are in TAIC-SIMO model leadership and InterestMachineTM products. Also new search abstractions kill the algorithm-snotty-boy (ASB) cross-matrix stalker searches
  • Marissa has something bigger to come: She wants 1) leadership position in Ecosystems, 2) to define and own next generation Devices and UI, and 3) she wants a new Search paradigm. The idea is that you don’t need to own the business, you have to lead it. Ownership follows.

3. Ecosystem

Winner-takes-it-all is a strategy: The winner defines the game and its rules. The winner changes the game and scores. The winner eates and swallowes or swallowes and digests. To be eaten and swallowed. That’s ecosystem (Ecosystem is not a good place for e.g. Nokia). What is TAIC-SIMO and Yahoo together:

  • TAIC-SIMO is more than an ecosystem
  • TAIC-SIMO is practice and engineering, not depiction like “ecosystem”. Ecosystem is talk and supposition.
  • TAIC-SIMO is very functional: today Apple, Google and Amazon have profitable businesses according to the model, Microsoft tries to get on the track with Nokia-Yammer-Skype
  • Yahoo can be the TAIC-SIMO player which takes 30% of Apple’s and Google´s businesses and kills Microsoft’s intentions.

4. Devices & UI

Communication machine regeneration cycle is 10 years. The last big things happened 1997 and 2007. We got first Nokia’s and then Apple’s change maker phones. Year 2017 is the next moment and Yahoo is there:

  • Nokia’s model 2110i (year 1997) and Apple’s iPhone (2007) have been revolutionary. The 2110i UI still lives in Nokia’s S40 Asha models and iPhone is still the most profitable smartphone.
  • 2017 is watershed for new devices and UIs. Chart “Reality-Knowledge-Media Device Evolution” shows how hard it is for Microsoft (Nokia), Apple and Google to keep up with the evolution (MS-Nokia the drunk or sober bovine, Apple the degenerated jogger, Google the long necked propellerhead). The rainmaker is the InterestMachine™ consortium.

Year 2017 is very realistic to launch InterestMachine™ One. Why are Apple, Google and Samsung not (NOT) working with such ideas? Well, Nokia just launched a back cover for Lumia 620, Apple is copying their iPhone 4 to create iPhone 5 and iPhone 5S, Samsung is copying their Galaxy II to get the III and IIII, IIIII, IIIIII and IIIIIII. Mobile device business has saturated and stupefied. Its time to change the rules.

As you see, the industry has reached the paradise and highest level is to copy oneself or make back covers. If I worked with Marissa I would propose negotiations with Sony to combine TAIC-SIMO and InterestMachine™. Yahoo and Sony are sharing the same fate in business success, therefore they fit together. Year 2017 is both near and far enough to arrange all TAIC-SIMOInterestMachine™ components perhaps with Fujitsu. Unfortunately one of the great companies, Ericsson, is on their arrogance path. Ericsson could be the first telecommunications network company to handle TAIC-SIMO and it could be the fourth member of the winner team. Maybe Ericsson wants to restructure their own business before Huawei does it?!

5. Search

Search is definitely one of the most important phenomena of the Internet but also of Yahoo. It is very funny that Google can’t see what’s next in search! They are just fine-tuning algorithms and sewing Web badges on people’s inner garments to mark them. Future search is approaching the next abstraction and the pattern is triple logarithmic, or even more:

  • Search has to be dynamic and based on a new abstraction of data. This means that today’s data and its descriptions through code and screens just saturated into “Clouds” and “User Experience”
  • The New Search is MIST+AR+AI+VR+IOP+4D (Hidden in chart) … (contact Risku to know more)
  • Future search does not stalk, delude, profile, advertise, mark or nose around. Here Google and Bing-Microsoft inevitably fail.

Reasons for Marissa’s present leadership & communication model:

  • She is totally alone at Yahoo without any relevant talents and leaders in-house (a GRO + Paperwork is really needed)
  • Plan B to come: Yahoo to become TAIC-SIMO + InterestMachineTM + Search rebel
  • Yahoo needs a Consortium to cooperate with. Marissa needs companies from TAIC-SIMO reservoirs (Sony, Fujitsu and Ericsson are my favorites)
  • Yahoo needs dog-kennel-management to oust old farts, wannabe “leaders” and mediocre “engineers” and “designers
  • Recruitment campaign: Marissa needs trusted visionaries and practical talents, a team of 5-9 person each one NOT from the pompous Web-Tech-Media ex-C-level pitiful moron wasteland.

Yahoo is credible enough to restructure its own business and revolutionize the Search, the Web and respective devices. Marissa Mayer is the Batwoman of future interests who can pull together people and companies for next generation interests and lead the vision, design and practices.

Juhani Risku, the InterestMachine man.

P.S. Facebook is the “Who company“, Google is the “What company“, Nokia wants to be the “Where company“. Yahoo from its “Y” is the “Why company“. Why is the most important question to ask and answer. That’s where Yahoo is coming to be.


P.P.S. This is not funny: If Nokia wants to be the “Where company” fate is sometimes so ferocious. In the lap of the gods some day soon we have to ask “Where is Nokia?” I have done so much work to keep Nokia independent and strong so why not just try to become a normal company?



Media, Technology and Web predictions for 2012

February 29, 2012

Consumer awareness, evils suffocated, design breakthrough, Screen saturation, philosophical bases, Leadership version 3.0

Screen business, Positive trends 2012, Juhani Risku Ivalo, uusi Nokia architect

Juhani Risku’s eight predictions for 2012:

  • A. Ever more global tech-media-Web companies try to access TAIC-SIMO businesses
  • B. Screen business is going to saturate, China & Taiwan & Korea are strong, old farts stall
  • C. Success through new abstractions & leadership, less bimbos hired
  • D. Design is way more important than forming plastic and
  • E. Ecosystem thinking needs to be clarified, there is no third horse
  • F. Philosophical movement to clarifiy intentions and actions on the Internet
  • G. Google and Facebook are challenged by decent and transparent business models
  • H. Hostile and deceitful gathering of consumer data comes to the end of the road

Screen business, Negative trends 2012, Juhani Risku Ivalo, uusi Nokia architect

29th Feb 2012,  Juhani Risku, Inari Finland


Maths for the Web, Tech and Media — priority list

February 26, 2012

Change can be envisioned, planned and executed…

… but you need visionary planners for execute. And there is a limited pool of Leonardian persons with street credibity and leadership talent to be recruited. But why do we increasingly recruit chatterboxes and bimbos?

Change has different grades and phases:

  • Patching up, symbianing to death, tremulous leadership and execution
  • Addition, adding forgotten code, “engineering”
  • Enhancement, facelift, perfuming, prettification, sissy issue
  • Upgrade, versioning, bug correction, clock speeding, new font, logo refresh
  • Development, “academic engineering”, MBA driven disaster
  • Evolution, external forces affect, things happen
  • Abstraction shift, transformation of fundamentals
  • Abstraction lift, next orbit, new dimension.

Patching, adding, facelifts and upgrades are the first signals of chosen pattern to lose. When a company’s strategic agenda is based on easy ways and gradual progress the downfall is knocking on the door.

Development is a corporate term where creation and diligence and leadership are outsourced, to nobody. Development is always too slow, roadmaps are “cautious”, nobody has mandate, nobody leads, nobody cares. Development is graveyard of ideas, passion and life.

Evolution is a free fall, it just happens out there. Evolution is big sister of development. Nobody envisions and leads evolution and still it is one of the main driftwood to take good grip.

Abstraction shift and lift are the only vehicles for success. Those are very unusual methods because the leaders in the companies should be competent visionaries, courageous and active, and committed. Only few companies like Apple, Google, Amazon and Facebook are capable to rely on abstracion shift and lift. It’s too risky. This is purely a leadership problem and that’s the reason for constant fall of nearly every company. Companies rather destroy themselves than hire competent visionaries with street credibility to redirect their business abstraction.


  • Chatterbox, native language speaker, blinded by power, usually MBA or similar superficial personality, historical cousins: politicians, psychopaths, Mussolini, Hitler, persons with one common feature: flood of words + lying + treachery + pretension + kim-jong-illing (or kim-jong-unning).
  • Bimbo (in professional context), man or woman elevated to a position the bimbo never would elevate herself/himself. Example of extreme simpletons finding each other (recruiter, recruit, team mates, organization, company, company strategy, company prospects, nation, country, coevals, workmates). Bimbo professional usually a man who is emotionally attractive in jargon and has a low bashfulness and modesty, but superficially suitable education. Bimbo professional appeal to incompetent superiors and recruitment leads usually to business insest (a.k.a. recruitment nepotism, prof. Ole Lange). Famous bimbos (AngBr, HwStr, MaHat, RoGan, TaHal, HP CEOs).
  • Coevals and workmates, they just don’t care. Famous bigwigs and notables of this kind allowing simpletons to destroy common achievements: Greeks, Germans and coevals globally of the Hitler era, Kodak personnel, Saab personnel).

New paradigms  suprises and mutations

Today’s successors fail because they can’t handle next epoch which favours altruism, voluntariness, art, drama, quality, critique, loyalty and trust. Success and business follows.

Abstraction shift & lift, quality, design, creation, altruism, Juhani Risku Nokia Ivalo architect

Every phenomenon has its pattern to perfection

Perfection has four steps: Primitive, traditional, modern and futuristic, Prim-Trad-Mod-Fut. First you are thirsty, then you develop drinks, drinks cultivated to cognac. You end up to raise the glass for sanctification. This pattern is an unstoppable caterpillar in evolution of civilisation.


Chart Evolution of phenomena 1. Two examples of phenomena becoming perfect. Drinking ends up to raise the glass, dwelling goes through architecture to sensual spaces. Any ennobling and refining process confronts forces against life, forces of conservatism and NIMBY lifestyle.

The Primitive phase is birth and DNA creation stage of phenomena. The first stress test happens in Traditional stage. Here regression, insult and destruction slams. Modern gives hope and opens new opportunities. Futuristic consummates the phenomenon.


Chart Evolution of phenomena 2. More refining patterns. Obstacles like organised education, political play, MBA governance model and “engineering” cause decadence and even kills evolution. Tradition distorts evolution and debilitates the DNA of phenomena. Tradition is the worst human invention ever.

If  Tradition could be bypassed the Modern would offer more extensively voluptuous features for coevals.

Challenges for 2013-2017: new abstractions, leadership shifts, drama, altruism, trust

1. Abstraction shifts and lifts, new paradigms

  • The only way to succeed is to shift and lift company’s business abstraction (not to cannibalise your own business)
  • iPhone was a shift from Nokia’s traditional mobile phone thinking to modern level
  • iPhone was not a lift of abstraction. To lift abstraction of mobile phones happens through formula VR + MIST UI + context awareness + tactile & sensual search + DNA of knowledge + SW development lift + Creative Community + Users trusting the actors
  • Abstraction lift is the next profitable model in media, technology and Internet businesses
  • Leadership: Ramp down MBA education, start Leonardian leadership program, fire all bimbo CEOs, bimbo SVPs, bimbo VPs, bimbo directors, bimbo politicians, bimbo presidents, bimbo prime ministers….

2. Screen-Internet-Media-Operator businesses (TAIC-SIMO model)

  • Every respectable company tries to build (at least partly) functioning SIMO model – Apple has the best functioning machine of SIMO model, Google close to Apple with a bit different angle
  • Sony would have best opportunities but they stumble with (stupid) PlayStation gaming
  • Samsung is a potential company to widen its business to Internet and media (from screens to Internet and media)
  • Suprises to wait for: Oracle, Intel, Fujitsu, Virgin etc. might penetrate to new business areas a.k.a. “Abstraction shift” (with strategic alliances, acquisitions, partnerships, consortiums)
  • Clearer ecosystem thinking clarifies where different companies are and what  their future prospects could be (
  • Advertisement spearheading communication and media has to be stopped ( “Why and how to bypass Google and Facebook with new search and social media solutions” as agenda to save our civilization
  • One new TAIC-SIMO alliance can revolutionize the future of Web, search and social media through trust, micropayments and UCC/UGC User Created/Generated content, Carrier/Operator activism, new contextual MIST UI and dynamic information visualisation.

There are two potential wonderworkers in Screen-Internet-Media-Operator chain who can make a difference in the business: the Media and the Operator. Why could those two losers make any difference? Because they are losing the most. Operators (mobile network operators) become day after day carcasses of the chain and they mutate into janitors of digital pipeline clean-up. Media has several dimensions of structural failures:

  1. Outdated print media withers away
  2. Free Web content
  3. News on the Internet
  4. Disastrous excesses: News of the World
  5. Operators (mobile network carriers) become digital pipeline janitors
  6. Operators tried to arrange media and content business but they failed.

3. New abstractions for Search and Social Media new abstractions

  • No consumer data gathering, no digital sniffing and snooping
  • Trust first, business follows
  • No cookies, no hostile and deceitful algorithms, consumers and business follow
  • More local administration and legal follow-up to Search and Social Media (no supranational hidden algorithms).

This movement prepares an epoch-making revolution to Web search and social media businesses. Billion dollar money flow changes direction from hostile and deceitful companies to egalitarian and trusted partners. As an example, Google and Facebook can be replaced by some corporations which after years of deprivation and theft start to reform. In other words, if News Corporation faces rebirth and restructures its business models it can be a trusted convener and host for successful Internet, media and technology consortium. Everyone needs a last chance to correct mistakes.

4. Organizations and Leadership

  • Smaller leadership teams to envisioning, product/service creation, design, prototyping, top team size 15-30 persons, led by Creative Officer with street credibility and proven competence (no bimbos in billion dollar business NOBIBI-DOBU)
  • Fragmented and muddled innovation and design models are outdated: you can’t lead a company with 5-10 research centers, design centers, innovation centers. Apple’s model is better: fewer persons and one site is more effective model than thousands of mediocre specialists led by bimbo directors and executives (like Nokia, Sony, followed soon by Huawei, LG, HTC…)
  • The most difficult global problem is to find creative leaders. There are 6-10 individuals from which 4 are committed to their own companies (so only 2-6 eligible leaders are available)
  • The creative leader problem besets Apple, Microsoft, Nokia, Sony, Huawei, Intel, HP, Oracle, News Corp., TimeWarner, Orange, Verizon, Vodafone…)
  • We need globally one (ONE) university to start a leadership program with totally new agenda to educate “Leonardian leaders” (it means non-MBA, non-Bimbo, non-Pompous, non-Corporation philosophy and grip).

5. User Interface  Fully contextual UI with VR, AI, SOM, 4D (MIST UI)

  • Understandability and structure of knowledge first, UI follows
  • Hermeneutic UI model
  • Screen abstraction shift & lift (MIST UI)
  • Abstraction shift & lift needed in university research and education.

Interfaces link people to essence of things, universes, knowledge and understanding. User interface is “My-connection-to-existence” which has been discarded in HCI and MMI, Human-Computer Interaction and ManMachine Interaction. Next generation interfaces need abstraction lift, Interfacelift.

24th Feb 2012,  Juhani Risku, Helsinki Finland

Screen business — what is it?

February 23, 2012

Screens are displays to interests, drama, content and media

Screen business Cinema iPad Juhani Risku Ivalo Nokia architect architecture

Evolution of the most important screen has been a blend of technology, drama, grayscales and colors. The first screen was in the cinema, the second was our TV in the livingroom. The third screen was Apple’s Macintosh. Then we got the fourth screen, black and green mobile phone display. The fifth was a bit colored phone/PDA screen with icons. Sixth screen was the early smart phone, Communicator screen. The seventh was iPad.

iPad has very strong lock-in effect because of its evolutionary and systemic bond with Apple’s culture, Macintosh and extremely functional applications and services. It is easier for Apple to widen screen abstraction to homes and urban space than for other parties like film industry, TV manufacturers, TV channels and Apple’s “competitors”.

But now we have a war of screens. Screen business is a quarter of Screen – Internet – Media – Operator business (SIMO) where companies and consortiums with full portfolio of SIMO products, services and solutions are winner. The others are losers. But there is only one screen manufacturer with full portfolio of SIMO total offering. But let’s look at Screen business only.

Juhani Risku: Screen business model: Samsung-LG-Sony-Apple-Huawei-Nokia-Fujitsu-Panasonic-Outsiders. Juhani Risku Ivalo architect

Chart Media Screens. Today’s screens start from small phones ending up to wde screen TVs. Samsung has the widest portfolio of screens followed by Sony and Apple. Nokia has screen breeches.

Many screen realizers are slaves for somebody else commanding the total business. Here the screen manufacturers are OEMs, original equipment manufacturers, for the Operation System realizers, see chart Nokia inside Microsoft. Google has several farmhands. The only free doer is Apple.

Juhani Risku: Screen business model, trends, winners and losers: Samsung-LG-Sony-Apple-Huawei-Nokia-Fujitsu-Panasonic-Outsiders. Juhani Risku Ivalo architect

Chart Media Screen trends, winners and losers. Some of the big screen actors have a positive grip to the future. On the contrary, some former big actors may fall.

Screen manufacturers have varied business models: Samsung is the leader with best design, widest product offering, high quality and top class innovation, creation and design. Samsung concentrates on products, services  and content is made by other parties. Samsung took Sony’s position when they jealously arsed around music and movie ownership.

LG is following Samsung’s pattern and soon overtaking Sony, perhaps after two years in 2014. Sony is the problem child: best brand has fallen to junk category. Superior portable music and audio has been transformed to Playstations! If you search Sony on the Internet you can’t find other Sony products and offering than stupid games.Sony should be buried as soon as possible to get a newborn Sony with new ideas and actions.

Huawei then. Huawei is like Nokia year 2004. Huawei wants to copy with shame without feeling any disgrace. Next five years may be successeful with this business model but Huawei has the fate of Nokia if they don’t start today (yesterday) own brilliant leadership in screen, media and network businesses. Huawei probably can’t do it because they don’t understand or believe it. They are going to nokiazise their demi-successful business. Trust me, I have seen what it means. It’s a pity because Huawei could be the rainmaker.

There are two companies who can suprise: Fujitsu and Panasonic. If both or one of them shift their business abstractions towards media, interoperability, search, content creation and Virtual Reality, they/the one can beat the others. Call me if you want to apply TAIC-SIMO.

23rd Feb 2012,  Juhani Risku, Helsinki Finland

Screen – Internet – Media – Operator businesses

February 21, 2012

Juhani Risku

Internet and media businesses under restructuring — …….  why only Apple and Google know it, Sony and News Corp. not?

Today´s media and ICT businesses has four dimensions: Screen & Internet & Media & Operator businesses SIMO or in other words TAIC  Technology – Access – Interest – Channel (SIMO-TAIC model PDF). TAIC model equals with SIMO model (Screen – Internet – Media – Operator). If a company dominates all dimensions like Apple or Google they´ll survive. If a company has only one dimension under control like Nokia = Screen, Facebook or Linkedin = Access, Disney or CBS = Interest, Vodafone = Channel, they need to join or form a holistic joint venture to survive.

New joint ventures in Screen & Internet & Media & Operator SIMO businesses can grow bigger and stronger than Apple, Google or Facebook. Also new joint ventures are more interesting and capable to create new solutions. An example: if you put together four players like Sony + Twitter + News Corp. + Vodafone you would have one of the strongest combinations for the next ten years. Samsung + Linkedin + Disney + Orange would also be an interesting combination and global footprint. You can read present Screen & Internet & Media & Operator business model in many ways:

  • Old media is in real trouble, they could challenge by acting as host and have head start in the joint venture (quickest ones choosing the strongest players). Old media may be the first mover in SIMO-TAIC.
  • Operators as channel parties are losing their power, operators may challenge or die. Channel part of TAIC model in the Utilities or pipeline dimension.
  • Nokia is in real trouble with only one screen without tablets, laptops, TVs and other appliances. Risku on Nokia. Nokia would be the easiest to help and quickest-to-profit company if they would restructure their leadership model immediately.
  • Microsoft is only a software company which means “back office” or “support system” work which is always replaceable (this is the reason for Microsoft to catch Nokia, Skype and later gain power over media companies). Software is diluting to clouds and bulk & open source offering.
  • Access companies are becoming stronger: first Google, then Amazon and Facebook, now Linkedin, later Twitter. If you own the access you own keys to the door or walled garden and that´s where people are.
  • Several screen (device, gadget) companies are astray or slaves like Sony, Samsung, RIM and Motorola. If they don´t find appropriate joint venture parties they drown. Nokia is a tragic example withering with Microsoft. Still Nokia-MS could succeed but only when they build a full TAIC-SIMO model. Now Nokia is the screen party, MS is only the back-office software party, so IMO dimensions are missing, and S dimension is only in its smallest grade, tiny little mobile screen only.
  • Media a.k.a. Interest business faces worst trouble: everything should be free and there is no future for stand-alone media/interest business. Media companies are the first ones to be concerned about their future and start immediate TAIC model execution. Today some media/interest companies are still big enough to invite the other parties to build future businesses. News Corp. is one of the smartest to understand this (James Murdoch and need for big change).
  • The most interesting thing is that nobody can help the companies. They think they have all the visions, strategies and talents to succeed. What the old school corporations have is an arrogant and pompous attitude.  The Risku Consortium has 60 global experts covering all dimensions of Screen & Internet & Media & Operator businesses.
  • To find a leader, CEO/CCO, for Screen & Internet & Media & Operator model is the most difficult thing. Present leaders and CEOs are either pompous and cocky wrinklies or blinkered simpletons guarding only their own dimension of the joint venture. Here we need new paradigm for leadership combining visions, diligence, boldness and strict execution. Once again there are some exemplars: Richard Branson, Steve Jobs, Larry Ellison, Dean Kamen and James Dyson. I would invite some of them to the Board of directors. There are roughly 30 suitable competent and credible persons from 6,7 billion coevals, Risku Consortium has three candidates for competent executive leaders and 25 persons to leadership teams to execute the SIMO model.
  • Notice 1: only few companies have structured their operations according to SIMO model. Normally they try to play with the old model: grow bigger with any means necessary. There is an impressive list of losers: Sony, Nokia, Philips, Motorola… But Apple, Google and now Facebook try to strengthen their positions through applying SIMO coverage.
  • Notice 2: only one Screen & Internet & Media & Operator alliance is going to beat present SIMO leaders Apple and Google. There is no such thing as several SIMO winners because altogether three slightly different actors can dominate in very unstable and explosive truce and armistice.
  • New Research and Development areas emerge: 1) understandability, how data, knowledge, ideas and thoughts should be organized  2) usability according to understandability, like MIST UI created by Risku Consortium  3) visualization supporting understandability, totally new abstractions needed to support media and screen businesses, dynamic & gamification visualization paradigms to be applied   4) complexity management, structuring phenomena according to MIST UI. There is no such thing as simple, combine design thinking to engineering and drama, and build   5) systemic solutions which are the only viable and compelling prodvices (product-services).

Strongest Screen & Internet & Media & Operator alliances in the future, SNOOKII group

I would invite Sony, News Corp., Orange to Screen & Internet & Media & Operator and create a new Access party. Then we would have the best wall-to-wall screen-device-gadget brand Sony, the biggest media actor News Corp. and a strong but eager operator Orange. To this strongest combination I would invite Oracle to realize all software, cloud and networking assets. They would together create new paradigm for Access dimension with similarities with Google, Amazon, Facebook and Twitter but with totally new relation to customers. When adding Intel with its Meego as technology company to a TAIC alliance the future is at its best.

In this Sony+News+Orange+Oracle+Kodak+Intel+Internet Access combination each of the companies reach abstraction shift to their businesses:

  • Sony creates a systemic interaction component to all products. Sony also gets more digital content available, today´s small portion is just a burden.
  • News Corp. opens its enormous content & media asset directly to consumers´ minds through Sony´s appliances.
  • Orange grows bigger and rises its business abstraction from pipeline provider to channel provider.
  • Oracle widens its operations to software through databases, knowledge management, understandability and cloud services.
  • Kodak needs to be restructured. Kodak also has highest potential to be the next winner.
  • Intel puts software directly to hardware through Meego and chips. It means faster processing and optimized use of technologies.
  • The new Internet Access dimension, to be established by SNOOKI group, could be bought from small competitors of Facebook, Twitter etc.

So, the SIMO model winner is :
Sony + News Corp. + Orange + Oracle + Kodak + Intel + new Internet access company, the SNOOKII group.

SIMO model in detail

Here you find brief vocabulary for Screen & Internet & Media & Operator SIMO businesses.

So the businesses of four components/dimensions are (four different definitions of abstractions of the same thing):

  1. Screen & Internet & Media & Operator (SIMO)
  2. Technology & Access & Interest & Channel business (TAIC)
  3. Technology – Internet – Media – Operator model (TIMO)
  4. Gadget-Internet-Media-Operator business (GIMO)
  5. Formula 1 = [easy + pleasant] + [access] + [interests] + [channel]
  6. Formula 2 = [UI, usability] + [data sort/filter engine, search provider, walled-garden-door-key] + [content, people, ideas, literature, music, films, media companies] + [operators, cable/satellite companies].

Explanation in detail:

T = Technology = Screen = Gadget = [easy + pleasant] = [iconic instrument, UI, usability]
A = Access = Internet oases = [access logic] = [data sort/filter engine, search provider + relevant search result, walled-garden-door-key]
I  = Interest = Media = [content, people, ideas, news, blogs, opinions, literature, music, films, media companies]
C = Channel = [operators, cable/satellite companies] = [channel/medium/highway] .

Juhani Risku Linkedin  / Google  / Critique

Vaasa, Finland, July 8, 2011




Big changes in Screen — Internet — Media — Operator businesses

February 20, 2012

Juhani Risku

What´s happening in mobile media industry?

Microsoft got Nokia for free, with zero dollars. HP got Palm and Meego and lost its focus. Sony kicks Ericsson out. Amazon adopts Android. Google takes Motorola. Samsung is strong but adrift. Apple rules through its systemic solution in products, services and content covering screens, Internet, media and operators.

Media, technology, Internet and operator businesses are facing  fundamental restructuring in organizing their dependencies. Here some examples:


1. Amazon + Kindle + Android going towards TAIC-SIMO businesses.

Result: Nearly follows Apple model; needs Access dimension; Operators love Amazon; Amazon gets easily Tech & SW partners; Amazon has Bezos as CCO.

But:  Amazon needs more media and wider Internet Access, more Screens and better Technology support

Solution: Amazon to build consortium with old media, technology, SW and establish new and wider Internet Access.


2. Sony+phones going towards TAIC-SIMO model.

Result: Nearly follows Apple model; needs Access dimension; Operators love Sony brand; Sony gets easily Tech & SW partners

But:  Sony  is  missing CCO, vision and leadership

Solution: Start from CCO, success follows.


3. Microsoft + Nokia + Skype towards TAIC-SIMO

But: Operator dimension is threathened; Skype is only technical Access, real Web access missing; No media dimension; MS & Nokia are harmful brands; Intel´s revenge is coming, competitors are very aggressive; hostile atmosphere around MS-Nokia; All reservoirs hate MS-Nokia, Media hates MS-Nokia.


4. HP + Palm + Meego towards TAIC-SIMO

What´s up: Big picture problem; disastrous leadership; Media, Access and Operator dimensions missing

Result: Palm adrift; HP restructure, Meego left alone.


5. Ideal TAIC-SIMO Consortium SNOOKII

This is the winner: Sony + News + Orange + Oracle + Kodak + Intel + Internet Access (new) SNOOKII.

Vision: SNOOKII group has widest overlap, best brands and challenger roles; New Access dimension to be established, don´t buy any of present Access companies, create a new one; Operational readiness in 6 months; strong CCO needed with absolute mandate; SNOOKII needs MIST UI


Charts above show some new consortiums and one big HP disaster. Amazon opens TAIC-SIMO business war by presenting Kindle Fire and collaboration with Google´s Android. Amazon is one of the most stable Internet Access companies but they need wider footprint to Internet services than books only. Amazon´s next move has to be towards news, films, videos and User Created/Generated Content UCC/UGC.

Sony is coming back to business. Ericsson can keep their networks and clouds but gadgets are Sony´s. Chart 5 shows Sony´s real strength: acting in three differnt dimensions makes Sony a strong host for TAIC-SIMO model consortium.

As Udayan Banerjee writes in his blog Do you see a pattern about mobile media and technology patterns, he really means that there is a clear focus and process to sustain in the businesses.

October, 12th 2011

Juhani Risku

Ecosystems – Apple, Google, Microsoft

February 19, 2012

Ecosystem in the Internet, media, screen and communication businesses

The idea of ecosystem in the Intenet, media, technology and mobile industry is normally understood as a closed input-output model of devices, services, content and respective parties, companies, suppliers, creators and consumers. One clear example of this well working one-company-band is Apple. Apple has created one very closed, controlled and profitable system with stable input-output model . In Apple’s ecosystem model output is divided into parts e.g. monetary profits of Apple, application developers, content and media creators and providers. All those parties also gain reputaion and Brand advantages through Apple’s ecosystem.

Chart TAIC-SIMO model. The real Internet, media and mobile communication Ecosystem consists of all companies acting on same line of business or on part of it. Typically the companies are struggling to get best resources from a limited professional reservoir. North Korea might be a closed business and operational environment, a closed ecosystem with loyal and committed people only for one master of the house. When Nokia is talking about their “own ecosystem”  they probably want too reach North Korea’s independence.

Where is Nokia in the Ecosystem space?

Microsoft ecosystem: Nokia-Yahoo-Skype-Bing-Xbox-Office. Juhani Risku Ivalo architect architecture

Chart “Nokia was swallowed into Microsoft’s embrace. Microsoft is the boss when leading the third horse. Microsoft “bought” Nokia and Navteq for $US zero (0), Skype for 8.5 $ Billion, Yahoo for XXX $.

Ecosystem in case Nokia. In organizational change year 2004 Nokia established ES (Enterprise Solutions), M (Multimedia), BI (Business Infrastructure) beside NRC (Nokia Research Center) and NET (Nokia Networks). This structure followed Juhani Risku’s model „Mobile Arena” from year 2002 which was an internal base for new business model combining Nokia’s existing assets like mobile phone and mobile network manufacturing. Since 2004 Nokia had very wide and innovative ecosystem thinking in strategies and corporate presentations for investors, analysts and journalists. This coherent mobile technology and media thinking was created some years earlier than Apple’s strategy of all-embracing ecosystem which was mainly built on top of iPhone after year 2007.

There are two different ways to think ecosystem: a limited and functional one-company-system, and an industry wide ecosystem where all companies, actors and consumers form one complex and ever changing and dynamic structure. Today 2012 Apple is still very close to its own ecosystem but Nokia, Samsung, ZTE and other companies are sharing the resources and markets of the industry wide open ecosystem.

To survive and rule one’s ecosystem happens through systemic products, services and content. Systemic means creation, management and governance of integrated and seamlessly functional input-output of a complex and dynamic business or industry (IKEA, Apple, Google). Mainly companies act as one party in a larger systemic branch (Samsung, Intel, any OEM company, any component manufacturer).

In media, technology, Internet and operator businesses the ideal systemic model is TAIC-SIMO model (Risku 2011). Apple has based its business successfully on this model, Google is acting with the same model but with different emphasis in details. Companies like Amazon, Microsoft and Facebook are trying to enter wider business footprint through TAIC-SIMO model by building consortiums (Microsoft-Nokia-Skype-Yahoo) or trying to penetrate to adjacent businesses (Amazon to tablets, Facebook to phones).

TAIC-SIMO model has been successfully run by strong visionary leaders like Steve Jobs at Apple, Sergey Brin and Larry Page at Google and Jeff Bezos at Amazon. Notice that there are no exiting successful examples of TAIC-SIMO model executed by mature corporations with externally hired leaders.

Microsoft entering TAIC-SIMO ecosystem

Microsoft’s attempt with Nokia, Skype and Yahoo is a trial to combine several billion dollar corporations to march towards one common direction. Challenges are extremely demanding: Microsoft has nothing to lose, Nokia may die out if Windows Phone fails, Yahoo has no future without Microsoft’s funding and Skype may survive when it reaches critical mass of 500 million users (Q3 2009). Microsoft’s consortium is astonishingly unbalanced and tangled in their separate strategies, capabilities and future business prospects.

Microsoft itself is extremely unbalanced in leading TAIC-SIMO type of business: Microsoft has 1) Windows OS, 2) Office package, 3) Bing search,  4) IT consulting and software for companies and 5) Xbox game station. Like MeeGo + OpenOfficeOrg + HotBot + Oracle/Accenture + Nintendo (MOHOAN) collective executive board leading the most diverse and complex systemic business in somewhat decent way! Microsoft’s product and services portfolio is fragmented into 80 % of software plus 20 % of games (yes, the kiddy thing!). Now they got phones, phone calls and another search weakling to wrestle with. Into the bargain the whole group is probably the modern version of Soviet leadership model. It just doesn’t work in business.

Apple can easily survive with its own mainly walled ecosystem of media content, mobile services, consumers and developers, earning huge profits. By the same time Nokia is a small part of an open and ever changing and complex ecosystem which is comparable to ecosystems in the nature: somebody is on top of the food chain, Darwinian laws matter, your company is an enemy to the others and it may be eaten or killed, your fellow creatures may betray you. Also internally the fittest leader who survives is not often the smartest and most diligent but a fruit of business nepotism.

In an open ecosystem company leaders may cause collapses never knowing what happened. This is one of the main reasons for Nokia’s free fall in smartphone and mobile media businesses: from year 2004 there were not a single person in the Board of Directors and Executive Board who would have been competent, visionary and leader in the Internet, media and mobile experience and mobile communication business areas. The Board members and top management even had no education, experience or track record in the new business environment. Apple’s and Google’s persons in charge had this all and therefore they succeeded.

Microsoft ecosystem: Nokia-Yahoo-Skype-Bing-Xbox-Office, spermatozoon + zygote structure. Juhani Risku Ivalo architect architecture  Microsoft ecosystem: Nokia-Yahoo-Skype-Bing-Xbox-Office, spermatozoon + zygote structure + red line. Juhani Risku Ivalo architect architecture   Microsoft ecosystem: Nokia-Yahoo-Skype-Bing-Xbox-Office, spermatozoon + zygote structure + red line + fade. Juhani Risku Ivalo architect architecture

Three Charts “Nokia swallowed into Microsoft’s embrace. Three visualizations of Microsoft’s zygote, inseminated by Nokia, Skype and Yahoo. This impregnation is an initial arrival for Microsoft to Screen and Access businesses. Microsoft consortium is missing Media and Operator dimensions of TAIC-SIMO model.

Chart 1: Basic MS group, Chart 2: Nokia’s position, Chart 3: Nokia’s position clearly.

When Nokia’s CEO Stephen Elop says that Nokia is the third horse in the war of ecosystems (in mobile communication) he does not recognize that Nokia has only one small screen when competitors have five different ones (phone, tablet, laptop, PC, TV), Microsoft offers only the UI User Interface and Bing search engine, Yahoo does not yet add any value and Skype does not fly yet. At the same time Apple and Google dominate their own ecosystems and the open common ecosystem overwhelmingly. There might be space for a third and fourth player but probably only in the open ecosystem where all actors already have found their places.

For Nokia and Microsoft it is a zero-sum game where you have to win consumers, developers and media content providers on your side with sublime and compelling systemic solution which is way better than the existing ones. A new company may have some details in the systemic solution better than the competitors have but how to convince consumers to switch from their satisfying or good service to a version 1.0 solution. One extreme factor for staying with your present host is the lock-in effect of device UI, brand, data storage, contextual and usability habits and personal contacts.

Good example of differences in ecosystem thinking through application developers:

  • Apple has very committed and loyal developers to create applications, games and content for AppStore. There are obvious reasons for this: Apple has easy coding language, good SW support for application creation, monetary process to pocket the gains, “Apple atmosphere and hype”, good marketing of applications. Apple also has a very loyal user tribe. They love Apple’s products and services and Apple Culture. All those factors support loyalty and commitment and make Apple its own ecosystem definer. Very rarely you can tempt developers to competitors´ side. Here the ecosystem is somewhat closed.
  • Nokia has bad history through Forum Nokia FN and C++ language in caring about developers. C++ is extremely difficult coding language,  FN gave only technical support to struggle with C++, FN did not support developers´ businesses, FN was arrogant enough not to listen to developers´ needs, FN was led by very incompetent person (Ms. Lee Epting) during the change making years 2003-08 when competitors attacked. Now when Nokia (or Microsoft) comes too late to application markets it has to fight to captivate developers´ minds.
  • Unfortunately the ecosystem is open. Nokia and Microsoft do not have an own ecosystem but they are a small part of a wider global ecosystem where we already have strong partners like Apple and Google with AppStore, iTunes, Android Store etc. Apple and Google can easily dominate at the expense of Nokia/Microsoft and they are way ahead in engaging developers. Nokia/Microsoft may never manage to create so strong bond with developers that it could be called ecosystem. Conclusion: Nokia/Microsoft is part of global ecosystem where Apple and Google are controlling the markets. To the detriment of Nokia/Microsoft in an ecosystem you may be killed, eaten or enslaved. Nokia/Microsoft is at the bottom of present food chain.
  • Microsoft is the host of Microsoft-Yahoo-Skype-Nokia group. Yahoo, Skype and Nokia are enslaved by their own business success to Microsoft’s ecosystem. From Microsoft’s perpective Nokia doesn’t offer satisfactory portfolio of screens to display access, media, content and services on the Internet.

As a result I think the main reason for Microsoft to swallow Nokia was the early emanation from late 1990’s: Psion Software EPOC became Symbian and then Nokia CEO Jorma Ollila said that Nokia is never going to let Microsoft conquer the mobile Operating System as they had done with the PC by Windows. This may be the reason why Microsoft allows even big losses and prolonged hanging on loose gallows.

So, there is one ecosystem. There is one developer community which endlessly seeks for better opportunities, there is one very disloyal customer who takes better products and solutions whenever they find them. In Soviet Union there was one closed ecosystem. It’s gone.

21nd Feb 2012,  Juhani Risku, Helsinki Finland

Only visionaries and individuals innovate

October 16, 2011

Asymco made (once again) an accurate analysis and visualization, now about innovation investments.

Asymco: You cannot buy innovation. In spite of Microsoft’s, Google and Nokia’s massive R&D growth, their returns from that investment have been meagre to negative in terms of margin and only Google showed appreciable sales growth.

Image 1. Asymcos original chart & quote: “In spite of Microsoft’s, Google and Nokia’s massive R&D growth, their returns from that investment have been meagre to negative in terms of margin and only Google showed appreciable sales growth.”

Here Asymco´s chart as base for future guestimation for year 2016:

Juhani Risku: "Conclusion: Only visionary leaders with street credibility can elevate a corporation through The Wall. Problem: How and where to find proper leaders?"

Image 2. Asymcos chart added with forecast year 2016. There are three groups outside The Wall, the Potentials are coming closer to Apple, the Piddlings are agonizing with their disorganized stragegies and actions, the Losers keep falling as independent companies.

The Wall is unbuyable: you can’t penetrate the Wall because either you are too big and boring, too arrogant and pompous or you are just too lazy and confused.

The only reason for staying in Loser, Piddling or Potential categories and not ascending North East is lack of visionary leaders with street credibility in your company. There are 10-15 companies on the chart and only three (3) proper leaders in two companies, and they already are bound to their own companies. Larry Page and Sergey Brin to Google and Jeff Bezos to Amazon. Well, and Chris Bangle at Samsung.


Easter Eggs: the Potentials are coming closer to Apple. Amazon, Google

So what happens to those street credible companies, the Potentials?

Google stalls because of saturation in attacking people like an advertisement stalker (but still stays far away from Losers but approaching the Piddlings)

Amazon moves closer to the Wall but can’t reach it because of insufficient business model (TAIC-SIMO). Bezos is a real visionary and leader but Amazon should enter TAIC-SIMO model by choosing right partners

Samsung is a bit more than an OEM (original equipment manufacturer) but not muck. Samsung is today kind of light-weight Sony from its best years (Walkmans, PSPs, stereos, TVs) and Samsung can progress by rising clock speed in production and keeping innovation factor stable.


Easter eggs: Losers keep falling as independent companies. RIM, Nokia, Sony

Losers then?

Nokia is unfortunately coming under bigger threat to lose everything. This makes me sad because of all efforts and open source strategies (Archive, WSJ about Book New Nokia, Nokia Rescue Booklet PDF, interviews) I have proposed. Nokia really is stuck in Microsoft´s deadly hug, must say: good for Microsoft!

RIM, too late too nothing. RIM has lost its main assets like the secure mobile mail system and QWERTY form factor. RIM could be a tiny partner in a larger TAIC-SIMO consortium.

HTC as a “little sister of OEM-Nokia” is not independent, it has to copy without pride, neighbours like Q’five, ZTE, Huawei and Samsung try to kill HTC. At last all OEM companies choke to death because of their trivial role and descending margins.


Easter Eggs: the Piddlings are agonizing with their disorganized strategies and actions. HP, Microsoft, Sony, Ericsson, Dell

Piddlings? They are basically harmless losers but not yet totally collapsed. The Piddlings agonize in their glorious pomposity.

HP tried TAIC-SIMO with Meego and Palm. After CEO changes we never know who is leading the company.

Microsoft has its own businesses with enterprises, clod, browser and Office package. But Microsoft has in one year attacked TAIC-SIMO by buying Yahoo, Skype, Nokia

Sony (inheritor of mother-Sony and SonyEricsson) is trying to move from losers to Piddlings butSony cant fight against Samsung with old weapons. Sony and Nokia are sisters of common curse: corporatism caramelized with arrogance, pomposity and pretending-to-be-Apple or wanna-be-Apple cultures (without any possibilities from leaders´ and visionaries´ dimension to realize it). When Sonys biggest problem is not to understand TAIC-SIMO business model it is obvious that Sonys new CEO Kazuo Hirai can´t alone change the company to success. They need an innovative, visionary and draconian CCO, Chief Creative Officer.


Apple logo


– Apple stays for many years alone behind the Wall and enjoys its stable position. The only problem Apple faces is to find a visionary leader with street credibility. Any in-house person is not going to survive as Apple CCO, and there are only five (5) competent persons globally available to take up the gauntlet. I have the luxury to know two of them.



– The charts expose only one crucial factor: Only companies which have a visionary leader with street credibility can innovate, execute and survive.

– The biggest problem ever is to find visionary leaders with street credibility. Especially difficult it is to find leaders to Screen & Internet & Media & Operator businesses (Technology – Access – Interest – Channel) businesses. Only Steve Jobs was a 360 degree leader, when Page-Brin together are somewhere 270 degrees, Jeff Bezos alone 269 degrees, Kazuo Hirai 179 and Stephen Elop 25.

– How to help Apple, Larry, Sergey, Jeff, Stephen and Kazuo? Lets find them a real leader for the future businesses. Well, nobody can help Google and Apple and it also is hard to help Amazon. But Sony and Nokia really need help. Perhaps Sony is the only one who can benefit from a visionary CCO with street credibility because CEO has totally different role in the company.

– The day when declining companies hire competent CCOs I’ll update the charts and Easter Eggs above. Perhaps the Losers become Piddlings, the Piddlings become Potentials.

2nd Feb 2012,  Juhani Risku, Helsinki Finland

Future of LinkedIn – the serious access to Web

July 5, 2011

LinkedIn has superior advantages to restructure the use of Internet.

LinkedIn, LinkeDin, Link&In, Linketin, Lidl

LinkedIn basic facts first:

  1. LinkedIn is an access to Internet
  2. LinkedIn is an earnest and soberminded access to Internet
  3. There are not many inappropriate participants on LinkedIn
  4. LinkedIn represents the serious and professional dimension on the internet
  5. There is no special progress in LinkedIn business (model, opportunities, evolution).

LinkedIn disadvantages:

  1. Basically nobody uses LinkedIn as the main access to Internet
  2. Basically you can’t use LinkedIn for anything (useful, interesting, conducive, epochal)
  3. Basically LinkedIn is for snooping
  4. LinkedIn allows only passive basking in dilute publicity
  5. LinkedIn is the diligent and veiled Stasi of business prying.

Some branding problems of LinkedIn:

  1. LinkedIn in its written form looks like Linkedlin
  2. Pronunciation of LinkedIn is too close to Lidl or Linktin or Linkdin
  3. LinkeDin is much better or Link&in or Link&IN
  4. LinkedIn is a dead man walking (for us dead men walking)
  5. Well, LinkedIn is not a brand, it is telephone catalogue.

How to help LinkedIn? Here some ideas:

  1. LinkedIn´s access dimension to Internet has to be restructured and reformed
  2. LinkedIn needs gravity categorization and classification
  3. LinkedIn needs “facebookization” (lock in effect through everyperson´s soberminded base added with full and semi-serious dimensions of interests)
  4. LinkedIn has to be transformed and morphed to become a brand
  5. LinkedIn needs full strategy update to go ahead with TAIC-SIMO business model
  6. LinkedIn needs technology, media and channel partners
  7. LinkedIn could be my favorite beside SNOOKII group in TAIC-SIMO (SNOOKII equals Sony + News Corp. + Orange + Oracle + Kodak + Intel)
  8. LinkedIn brand clarification and refresh program (to diminish telephone catalogue and dead man walking effects).

TAIC-SIMO business model. Look how alone LinkedIn is sandwiched amongst googles and techcrunches. LinkedIn has to find partners from Interest, Channel and Screen businesses. Otherwise LinkedIn has MSN and Yahoo kind of downfall. Maybe RIM+Vodafone+Vivendi+Hitachi+LinkedIn?

So, the LinkedIn advantage to to restructure the use of Internet is in strengthening and widening its Access dimension in TAIC-SIMO model. Also LinkedIn would be one of the few respectable hosts for a new TAIC-SIMO consortium (the old ones are Apple and Google, some potential candidates are Microsoft-Yahoo-Skype-Nokia and Amazon, but unfortunately not my favorite SNOOKII).

10th Dec 2011,  Juhani RiskuInari Lapland