September 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30        

« 2007; CRM 2.0 Gets Going | Main | 2006 Final Entry? Yep. I AM Spiderman! »

December 28, 2006

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83452eab969e200d83444174c53ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Michael Smock is One Dogged Dude:

Comments

PaulSweeney

Enjoyed that no end !

GrahamHill

Paul

I am surprised that anyone believes analysts' forecasts these days. Whilst the trend spotting often proves to be reasonably accurate, the numerical forecasts are usually spuriously (in)accurate. This is the forecaster's dilemma that John Kay describes when he says "the only information anyone offering confident predictions about ...fill in a subject... gave was that you should not pay attention to them" in his blog at http://www.johnkay.com/in_action/468.

Graham Hill

PS. Most Darwiniam biologists today pay much less attention to the 'nature red in tooth and claw' that you describe and much more to strategies of cooperation. Brandenburger & Nalebuff's writing on 'Co-opetition' (balanced cooperation and competition) is much closer to modern business models than Sun Tsu's much over-used works.

David Sims

Yes, I do have the tendency to induce mental opacity in people...

Paul's absolutely right, were it not for Mike's Tiger fandom he'd be A-1. As it is he comes pretty close, anybody who laments the absence of reasoned analysis is my kind of guy.

I don't know that I'd fault Bob Chatham for his work in particular, I've never heard anything derogatory about his analysis, it's just that I cast a colder eye on the whole field of selling crystal-ball guesses for $499 in the first place. It's not Bob's fault Forrester's still peddling his report long after his projections were superseded, but it does point up, as you say, the dart board nature of such reports in the first place.

The comments to this entry are closed.