博客聚合-BenThompson 科技博客 | （一）Aggregation Theory 聚合理论

一个搬运小计划

接下来的日子打算不定期搬运一个科技博主的文章，以下附上介绍：

Ben Thompson |创始人

曾于苹果、微软和 Automattic 工作，专注于战略、开发者关系和市场。Kellogg MBA，同时拥有西北大学 McCormick Engineering school MEM 学位，专注于人性化设计。从 2013 年开始写 Stratechery.com

搬运的主要原因还是自己对科技行业的兴趣，以及 Ben Thompson 很多的文章分析了很多科技公司的商业模型。读他的博客让我深感，科技公司之所以颠覆行业，很多时候不是因为有了一项多牛 x 的技术，而是在价值链中找到了可以用科技或者与用户新的交互进行突破的环节，科技不是唯一的关键，运用科技手段突破现有行业价值链中可以被改变的环节才尤为重要。

今天这篇文章可以说是一个基础，揭露了很多家科技巨头改变行业方式的共性，Ben Thompson 从价值链和传统行业开始讲述，希望你们喜欢。之后会涉及一些具体公司的具体案例分析和模型分析。

第一次搬运，采用一段英文一段中文的格式。一是担心自己翻译不准确的时候大家可以直接对照，二是也方便想学英语的朋友阅读顺畅，如果有任何建议欢迎给我留言。

原文链接：

The value chAIn for any given consumer market is divided into three parts: suppliers, distributors, and consumers/users. The best way to make outsize profits in any of these markets is to either gAIn a horizontal monopoly in one of the three parts or to integrate two of the parts such that you have a competitive advantage in delivering a vertical solution. In the pre-Internet era the latter depended on controlling distribution.

任何一个消费市场的价值链都被分为以下三部分：供应商、分销商和顾客/用户。创造高额利润的最佳途径要么是「在这三部分中的一部分创造自己横向的垄断」要么是「合并其中的两部分以打造在垂直解决方案中的竞争优势」。在还没有互联网的时代，后者仰赖于控制分销渠道。

For example, printed newspapers were the primary means of delivering content to consumers in a given geographic region, so newspapers integrated backwards into content creation (i.e. supplier) and earned outsized profits through the delivery of advertising. A similar dynamic existed in all kinds of industries, such as book publishers (distribution capabilities integrated with control of authors), video (broadcast avAIlability integrated with purchasing content), taxis (dispatch capabilities integrated with medallions and car ownership), hotels (brand tRust integrated with vacant rooms), and more.

例如，报纸曾是向指定地域内的顾客传递内容的主要途径，于是报纸向后整合了内容创作（即供应商）并通过传播广告赢得了高额利润。类似的机制存在于所有行业类型，例如图书出版商（分销能力与对作者的把控结合），视频（放送能力与内容购买力结合），出租车（调度能力与持照和车辆拥有权结合），酒店（品牌信誉与空房结合）等。

Note how the distributors in all of these industries integrated backwards into supply: there have always been far more users/consumers than suppliers, which means that in a world where transactions are costly owning the supplier relationship provides significantly more leverage.

仔细看这些行业的经销商是如何向后整合进供应的：用户/消费者的数量总是大于供应商，而这意味着在一个交易成本高昂的世界，拥有供应商关系可以赋予其极高的杠杆。

The fundamental disruption of the Internet has been to turn this dynamic on its head. First, the Internet has made distribution (of digital goods) free, neutralizing the advantage that pre-Internet distributors leveraged to integrate with suppliers. Secondly, the Internet has made transaction costs zero, making it viable for a distributor to integrate forward with end users/consumers at scale.

而互联网带来的最根本颠覆是从这个机制的头部开始的。首先，互联网将（电子产品的）分销成本降为零，中和了前互联网时代分销商向供应商整合的优势。其次，互联网将交易成本变为零，如此一来，分销商向前与大规模终端用户/顾客进行整合具有了可行性。

图示：前互联网时代 VS 互联网聚合后

This has fundamentally changed the plane of competition: no longer do distributors compete based upon exclusive supplier relationships, with consumers/users an afterthought. Instead, suppliers can be commoditized leaving consumers/users as a first order priority. By extension, this means that the most important factor determining success is the user experience: the best distributors/aggregators/market-makers win by providing the best experience, which earns them the most consumers/users, which attracts the most suppliers, which enhances the user experience in a virtuous cycle.

这彻底改变了竞争的战场: 分销商不再基于独家供应商关系进行竞争。这样一来，供应商可以被商品化（commoditized: 意思是由谁当供应商都不重要），以此消费者获得第一优先级。具体说来，这意味着决定成功的要素成为了用户体验：最好的经销商/资源整合者/市场创作者通过提供最好的体验赢得最多的消费者/用户，以此吸引最多的供应商，并提升用户体验 – 一个良性循环。

The result is the shift in value predicted by theConservation of Attractive Profits. Previous incumbents, such as newspapers, book publishers, networks, taxi companies, and hoteliers, all of whom integrated backwards, lose value in favor of aggregators who aggregate modularized suppliers — which they often don’t pay for — to consumers/users with whom they have an exclusive relationship at scale.

这样的结果即价值转移。这个在 Conservation of Attractive Profits （暂且翻译成有「诱人的利润留存*」吧，作者也有一篇文章专门聊，后期也会搬运过来）中被预测。行业现任者，例如报纸、书籍出版商、出租车和酒店，他们都是向后整合，面对整合模块化供应商的聚合者，他们失去了这部分对聚合者有利的价值：聚合者们与消费者规模性的排他关系。这部分价值的获取对于聚合者来说往往是零成本的。

For example:

例如：

Google

Google谷歌

Facebook (and Ad Networks)

Facebook脸书 （和广告网络）

Amazon 亚马逊

亚马逊

Netflix

Netflix 奈飞

Snapchat

Snapchat

Uber

Uber

AIrbnb

AIrbnb

It’s interesting to consider the order of these examples: the pioneer of this model was Google which modularized content providers. It’s easy to see why this is the case: content has always been monetized by proxy, whether it be paying for newspapers (or advertising space in those newspapers), paying for CDs, or paying for cable TV. The shift to digital has exposed these proxies for the rent-collection mechanisms they are

从顺序上来看这些例子也很有趣：这个模型的先锋是 Google – 模块化内容生产者。原因也显而易见：内容总是被代理商商品化，不论钱是给报纸（或报纸上的广告位），给 CD 还是有线电视。这场数字化的转移揭露了这些代理商的租金收集机制。

Facebook, though, has built in some respects an even stronger position: its suppliers are its users, so while it, like Google, aggregates content that it gets for free, it also has exclusive access to that content. Snapchat and other user-generated content networks are similar.

Facebook，在一些其他方面搭建了自己甚至可以说处在一个更强的地位：用户即生产商，所以，尽管像 Google 一样地集合免费获取的内容，它同时独家占有这些内容。Snapchat 和其他 UGC （用户原创内容）的内容网络都与之类似。

The third wave are industries that don’t have such an obvious digital component. AIrbnb, for example, deals with vacant rooms; what makes it work is the way it has digitized — and thus commoditized — tRust. Uber deals with cars; it has digitized both tRust and dispatch. More importantly, both have nAIled the user experience in a way that incumbents have been sorely lacking. Both companies also sit in a sort of middle ground between Facebook and Google: their suppliers are not exclusive in theory, but increasingly areexclusive in realityasboth benefit from a virtuous cycle of more users leading to increased utilization of suppliers.

第三股潮流发生在那些似乎没有明显数字化成分的行业。举例而言 AIrbnb 做空房的生意；其运用数字化的经营的方式使之有效地将信任商品化。Uber 做车的生意；它信任和派遣数字化。更为重要的是，以上二者都紧扣用户体验，而这种方式恰恰是行业现任者们极为缺少的。这两家公司的定位看起来似乎处在 Facebook 和 Google 中间：他们的供应商理论上来讲并不独家，但是事实上却持续性变得独家化，因为他们都从用户量上升的良性循环中提升着供给方的利用率。

What is important to note is that in all of these examples there are strong winner-take-all effects. All of the examples I listed are not only capable of serving all consumers/users, but they also become better services the more consumers/users they serve — and they are all capable of serving every consumer/user on earth. This, above all else, is why consumer technology companies are so highly valued both in the public and private markets.

值得注意的是，上述例子都是 winner-take-all （赢家通吃）。他们不仅可以服务所有顾客/用户，持续获客又推动他们成长为更好的服务商。以上就是为什么消费者技术公司如此被大众和私有市场所看重。

Looking forward, I believe that Aggregation Theory will be the proper framework to both understand opportunities for startups as well as threats for incumbents:

向未来展望，聚合理论将成为理解初创公司机会和现任公司威胁的重要理论基础：

行业内现有公司的关键差异性在哪里，以及是否有某些方面的差异性可以被数字化？

如果该差异性被数字化，竞争转移到用户体验，这将给到行业新秀们巨大的优势

赢得用户体验的公司将可以生成一个良性循环：他们对顾客/用户的占有率将吸引供应商们，而拥有更多的供应商将能够帮助他们进一步提升用户体验

The Uber and AIrbnb examples are especially important: vacant rooms and taxis have not been digitized, but they have been disrupted. I suspect that nearly every industry will belatedly discover it has a critical function that can be digitized and commodified, preCIPitating this shift. The profound changes caused by the Internet are only just beginning; aggregation theory is the means.

Uber 和 AIrbnb 的例子极具启示意义：空房和出租车不能被数字化，但他们仍然颠覆了行业。我猜想近乎任何行业或早或晚将被发现是有关键职能是可以被数字化或商品化的，那一刻将推进变革。这个被互联网引起的变化才刚刚开始；聚合理论正是其手段。