Competition is for Losers with Peter Thiel (How to Start a Startup 2014: 5)

Peter Thiel discusses this same doom loop and some of your points in this lecture that I highly recommend: ▶ this video

For context, this article is about a new book, 'The Contrarian' about Thiel (I haven't read the book). I've long been a fan of Peter Thiel's thinking. If you're unfamiliar, this talk from YC's Startup School 2014 covering the ideas from Zero to One is excellent: ▶ this video But back the book this article is based on, I found this review of the book on Amazon quite insightful: link I've never met Peter Thiel, don't know much about him personally, and don't agree with everything he says and does, but he's a complex and interesting character that I've learned a lot from over the years. I think we all can.

Whenever I hear someone saying the market is huge I think of this classic Thiel talk. Sounds like its definitely something you should watch. ▶ this video

One phenomenon I've recently clued into is that of the "market-hostile business". Not only old businesses, watch Peter Thiel's "competition is for losers": ▶ this video

Watch this talk, "Competition is for losers" (by Peter Thiel) ▶ this video It's a clickbaity title but it's a serious talk.

“Competition is for losers” - A talk from Peter Thiel hosted by Y combinator ( ▶ this video ) Timestamp 13:50: “If you’re a startup, and you want to get to a monopoly, start with a really small market and you take over that whole market and then you find ways to expand that market in concentric circles” Last I checked Zuckerberg is doing precisely what Thiel taught him to and has done it with preternatural skill. This is the standard for how you’re expected to act as a technology “leader” - which the majority of VC backed unicorn goal founders (like every FAANG founder) have been executing since day zero.

Markets are inevitable: create an arbitrarily oppressive prison and you will watch some “black” market emerge: markets grow like weeds: it’s just silly to argue that we should have markets or not. But markets are not a-priori useful to the broader society just by being markets! A necessary (but not sufficient) condition for a market to be useful is that it substantially avoids lasting and structural market failures. Market failures are almost as common and ubiquitous as markets! They vary in duration and consequence. The ultimate market failure is to have costs which include a profit margin but little or no competition to get the benefits of a market. Healthcare like other mandatory purchases (you can buy an ambulance ride and six figures of hospital while unconscious!) is especially prone to market failure. The United States especially (though late neoliberal “capitalism” to some degree generally) and HN/SV/EA especially now go so far as to actively endorse induced market failure as the goal . Fuck that. Fuck everyone who is on board with it. This is your goblin brainchild @pg: renounce it. ▶ this video

I mean, Unit 5 of Thiel’s startup 101 lectures at Stanford is titled “Competition is for Losers”. He leads off with making sure everyone is crystal clear that “attaining a monopoly” aka anti-trust fraud is his “idee fixé”. This isn’t hosted on InfoWars. It’s hosted on YC’s YouTube channel. It’s not a secret what these guys are doing and plan to do more of: ▶ this video

By control point you can understand a corporation or a government, no need for false dichotomies: in the age of capital there is no beyond. Enron was a weak company, nowhere near the escape reality velocity: at peak, in 2000, they had a market capitalization of $60 billion, at the same time Microsoft was at $600 billion [1]. Also, any company worth their capital knows very well that "competition is for losers" [2] and dreams of the ultimate consolidation [3]. [1] The Largest Public Companies by Market Cap (2000–2022), link [2] Competition Is for Losers, link , ▶ this video [3] The Consolidation Curve, link

Interesting, fun also some of the reactions I got to my many ideas. I have realised that one needs some sort of monopoly to make any money. ▶ this video

This post misses the forest for the trees. The reason for the low margins in the restaurant business is the lack of differentiation. Their products are largely commoditized, so they have no competitive advantage or market power. Peter Thiel discussed this in a lecture for YC, where he said that you can work very hard to make the best restaurant in a city, but it doesn't give you much pricing power, because the second best is still pretty good.[1] [1] ▶ this video

I'm a little iffy on this idea that there is any monopoly on air travel in the US in any general sense. Maybe for specific routes, but if you look at the big picture, you have: 4 "major" carriers - American, Delta, United, Southwest 1 "mid major" / borderline major in Alaska Airlines 1 "not a major, but not exactly a regional carrier" in Jet Blue and a bunch of regional outfits like Frontier, Porter, Spirit, etc. That's not to say that more competition wouldn't be nice, but it's hardly the case that there is no competition. Heck, as far as that goes, Peter Thiel uses airlines - and their razor thin profit margins - as the prototypical example of why "competition is for losers"[1] in his talks. [1]: ▶ this video