The user experience is quite bad, store fails to scan my palm. Sometimes, items are scanned wrongly, takes time to register my palm, create a new account etc etc. Feels way more of a hassle, than convenience.
That said, maybe Tencent will figure this one out.
“If you buy a business just because it’s undervalued, then you have to worry about selling it when it reaches its intrinsic value. That’s hard. But if you can buy a few great companies, then you can sit on your ass. That’s a good thing.” - Charlie Munger
这是腾讯目前日活、整个生态最强壮的平台，但也已经有12年的历史了。QQ由盛到衰、到期待下一次转型的时间也是12年。所以，微信这棵老树如何发新芽，是一个很大的问题。BAT公司里，目前好像只看到我们还有机会发点新芽，其他新树都在茁壮成长，也带给我们很大的压力。
☝Great that they recognize the risk of Weixin obsolence.
一年前，我说视频号是“全鹅厂的希望”，经过一年多的发展，的确不负众望，在成长过程中给我们很多惊喜，让我们在过去短视频失利的情况下，重新具备了一个坚实的抓手。最关键的是，我们不是跟在别人身后做一样东西，而是结合自身特点、做熟人社交的短视频。
我们用户群体的消费能力很强，但多年来我们缺乏的电商知识还是要补的，所以我们今年能够全力发展的就是视频号直播电商，电商和广告是相辅相成的。
👆Here he confirms the differentiation of their Video Channel, the weixin community advantage.
另外，微信还有很多新芽还在酝酿，比如小程序、小游戏和搜索等，如何把我们的产品和服务常青化，是很值得大家思考的。
👆 so he also acknowledges the under-monetization to build more everlasting products & services.
游戏：不能躺在功劳簿上，游戏出海是公司国际化最大希望
And great way to encourage the current golden goose (game) not to be complacent.
游戏是我们的王牌业务，目前号称全球最大的游戏公司，好像是躺在成功的功劳簿上。但在过去一年，我们受到了很大挑战，新生代游戏公司层出不穷，从玩法类到内容类的转变，我们一时无所适从，友商不断产出新品，我们就好像毫无建树的感觉——我们也推出了新品，但没有想象中那么好。最近两个月投入的休闲合家欢派对游戏《元梦之星》，也是刚进入战场。虽然晚，但它对我们来说不仅是一款游戏，还具有偏社交的成分，这本身就是我们的大本营阵地，肯定要全力以赴，而且要求所有业务结合，探索共同发展。
😅so here explains why they push so hard for 元梦之星 game, because this is supposed to be their "social media" playground, they must be shocked by the unexpected success of Eggy Party in China and hence spending humoungous bullets to get into war with NetEase (but Eggy Party seems to be holding their ground against my expectation 🤣, not sure I'm supposed to be happy or sad, 2 of my top 3 holdings fighting to dominate the Party game).
My views are your Gilbert & Sullivan's:
"The flowers that bloom in the spring, have nothing to do with the case".
02-02-2024, 01:06 PM (This post was last modified: 02-02-2024, 01:06 PM by weijian.)
To be honest, as a parent, some of Xi's policies to abolish for-profit education institutions and reduce game addiction, are actually welcomed by me. But of course, as an investor, not much.
In the greater scheme of things, which is better in the long run? Of course it depends on where you stand!
Tencent, Nexon soar after approval for marquee game
The title’s approval is a big boost for Tencent’s 2024 pipeline, which still relies in part on years-old titles and is hungry for new blockbusters. The Chinese company had counted on the title to bolster its pipeline as far back as 2020, but the game failed to emerge at the height of a Beijing regulatory crackdown. Nexon said at the time it was delaying the title to comply with restrictions aimed at curbing addiction and playtime among Chinese minors.
Consumerism is bad, it feeds on addiction and the need to feel part of the group or to keep up with trends.
The china e commerce platforms are superb in this making ppl come back to spend more and more. The social entertainment has attracted many simps and girls to spend money on their chinese influencers and idols on entertainment platforms. With more money spent, the concept of velocity of money kicks in and economic growth ensues. If china reins in on these addictions, naturally the velocity of money slows. This is what we are seeing now, China wants to kick its citizens off addictions or "their own version of sins", but sin creates wealth; without these sins, we are now seeing a poorer China
(02-02-2024, 01:55 PM)CY09 Wrote: Consumerism is bad..
..
Feels like this is something that have to be determined by the market. A command economy has been tested throughout history, and it usually doesn't turn out well for anybody; except those making the decisions.
“If you buy a business just because it’s undervalued, then you have to worry about selling it when it reaches its intrinsic value. That’s hard. But if you can buy a few great companies, then you can sit on your ass. That’s a good thing.” - Charlie Munger
03-02-2024, 02:09 PM (This post was last modified: 03-02-2024, 02:15 PM by weijian.)
hi Wildreamz,
As a history buff, I am afraid I have to take umbrage with your statement "tested throughout history".
As a matter of fact, capitalism is only a recent phenomenon compared to our thousand years of civilized history. Even if we start modern age with the Renaissance era (1600-1700s), Capitalism took half of that period (~150 years since 300years ago) to evolve. For comparison, Communism took about a third of the time (~100years since 300years ago) to evolve. Not really an "apple to apple" comparison.
That said, the dichotomy that we experienced post WW2 between East Berlin and West Berlin - does seem to suggest that Capitalism has the upper hand. The people are the same, just separated by a wall. Capitalism seems just fine for the Germans. However, in the first 20years after WW2, the Soviets seemed to have the upper hand over the Western world! After all, the Communists were the 1st ones to send something up in orbit in 1960, before the competitive spirit of the Western world overcame communal spirit (human nature is weak and corrupted after all) and sent man to the moon by 1969. That decade was probably the pivot point in history between 2 idealogies - concidentally also the start of semiconductors, imagination (Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos were teens then - right person at the right place at the right time!) and Nifty Fifty.
So what is my point after regurgitating all these?
My point is that it is dangerous to take lessons from history, if we do not apply the correct context or look at longer periods.
Would a non-command and control economy have taken China to its current state? Of course we don't have an alternate history to compare. But I would like to think that another big democracy, ie. India with comparable population/land mass can be used as a potential apple-to-apple comparison here.
GDP per capita (2021)
India: 2,256.59 USD (Independence: 1947)
China: 12,556.33 USD (Independence: 1912 if you are nationalist or 1949 if you are communist)
Mind you, India had the Victorian system inherited from the British and came off relatively unscathed from WW2. But just comparing the GDP per capita, China looks way ahead of India. In our lifetimes, what is the probability of the Indians overtaking the Chinese?
Finally, Is the Red Dot's story a history of a relatively "command" economy?
P.S. This world is much more murky and grey, than shades of black and white.
(03-02-2024, 02:09 PM)weijian Wrote: GDP per capita (2021)
India: 2,256.59 USD (Independence: 1947)
China: 12,556.33 USD (Independence: 1912 if you are nationalist or 1949 if you are communist)
Mind you, India had the Victorian system inherited from the British and came off relatively unscathed from WW2. But just comparing the GDP per capita, China looks way ahead of India. In our lifetimes, what is the probability of the Indians overtaking the Chinese?
Finally, Is the Red Dot's story a history of a relatively "command" economy?
P.S. This world is much more murky and grey, than shades of black and white.
20 years ago, who would have thought of China closing up with USA in term of raw GDP? But then, in term of GDP per capital, China is as rich as Russia and well Malaysia. It is conceivable that India could surpass China in our lifetimes. But then, is your lifetime or mine or that of a little kid.
Your way writing implies that says India f*** up despite inherited a better system and China has nothing back then. Maybe it is true but throughout history, people from the rich seldom spoke about India or the empire of India or whatever the names was, but China dominated the world history, especially GDP for so long, even to Qing.
The rise of China should in my view the fall and subsequent rise of China.
Homepage
PR Newswire
However, in the first 20years after WW2, the Soviets seemed to have the upper hand over the Western world! After all, the Communists were the 1st ones to send something up in orbit in 1960, before the competitive spirit of the Western world overcame communal spirit (human nature is weak and corrupted after all) and sent man to the moon by 1969. That decade was probably the pivot point in history between 2 idealogies - concidentally also the start of semiconductors, imagination (Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos were teens then - right person at the right place at the right time!) and Nifty Fifty.