After arriving in the United States, Gu Ao immediately devoted himself to the promotion and promotion work of "The Dilemma of the Innovator".

For him, this is not just a book, but also a bargaining chip to leverage this year's US stock market crash and establish a prophecy. It is also his killer weapon to ensure the valuation of the computer market of sniper Wang An.

The superposition of so many meanings has forced everything to be cautious.

Two days before April Fools' Day, Gu Ao, at the request of McNamath, also relied on the inherent old relationship between Gu Ao and Ted Turner, to appear on an interview program by CNN, specifically talking about the valuation of the technology industry. The program's response was quite good, and it was considered by many American retail investors to be the conscience of the industry.

After all, Times Group is an American media giant who holds Times and many Warner-based media.

Therefore, even if it is promoted and promoted for friends, the methods of doing things are quite stylish. You will not be able to play duplicate advertisements directly, and you will have to package them into various forums and interviews.

Of course, at the normal pace, such a program will definitely be refuted by heavyweight opposing guests. It was just because Gu Ao's book had not been published at that time and everyone didn't know what he would say and could not prepare, which made him more easily gain the first wave of public awareness.

However, this kind of luck will not last too long. Once his book is released, those who want to stare at his controversy will definitely buy it and think about it carefully, and then find the right angle to fight back.

No matter what, the attention in the professional circle is that you have to refute it after you have enough attention, or at least you have to buy a book and read it carefully before refuting it.

On April 1st, under the efforts of the times, the daily on-site sales of "The Innovator's Dilemma" broke the threshold for measuring bestsellers in the American book industry.

In the American publishing industry in the 1980s, it was generally believed that after the first printing, 50,000 sets were sold in a short period of time. Even "best-selling books" did not strictly require the first day, and some even the first week. This is a threshold standard that can be roughly understood as the order of 3,000 literary websites in later generations.

Gu Ao's "The Innovator's Dilemma" sold 78,000 copies on the first day, and even tens of thousands of remote mail order reservations. If all of these are counted, there will be between 100,000 and 150,000.

There is no problem with such achievements being classified as "bestsellers". If you work harder and make a little effort, you can enter the top ten bestsellers in the United States and find a position.

According to the market conditions of the US publishing market in the late 1980s, the top three works on the annual best-selling list must reach 2 million sets of annual sales, which is equivalent to 5% of American families buying one within a year.

This kind of book is basically not a literary work. Instead, it mainly focuses on commercial works and popular topics of historical and social aspects in the 1980s. A period of success theory was also quite popular in the United States. However, when China began to become popular in success theory, the United States was long outdated.

The first day was 70,000 or 80,000, and the average daily rate of 50,000 on the three days of the following weekend was 50,000. In just one week, the total sales of "Innovators' Dilemma" exceeded 300,000 sets. And I heard that subscribers are highly overlapping with users of elite media such as the Wall Street Journal.

The Wall Street Journal has 200,000 year-on-year subscribers. Although there are few people, they are global business and investment elites. These people have the fastest reaction speed. So even for defensive purposes, they will critically buy a book by Gu Ao.

In the second week, because the backlog of professional purchasing power was released, sales suddenly dropped by more than half, with only sales of more than 100,000 in about a week.

According to Times Group's estimate, the remaining two weeks of the first month can remain above 100,000, which is equivalent to the total sales of 700,000 units in the first month.

Even if the results decline a little later, the average monthly price of the remaining months in the first half of the year is about 200,000 yuan, and the second half of the year is tens of thousands per month. Together, it can easily meet the "2 million yuan for the whole year" indicator, which is ranked among the top three of the best-selling lists in the United States.

...

When Xiao Sui, who saw McNamath and the Times group's support, followed Gu Ao to the United States, was secretly shocked when he saw it.

She estimated that the promotional media resources spent by the Times alone are worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, and the subsequent publicity expenses this year may cost more than one million.

A million US dollars is certainly not much money for Gu Ao, nor is it money for Times Group. But if you just publish a book, no matter how popular it is, it will be difficult to offset this part of the cost.

Xiao Sui naturally couldn't understand why McNamas was so righteous to Gu Ao.

She could see that although Gu Ao was also very influential in the American technology industry, he had definitely not yet reached the point where he had "published a monograph on business management and investment philosophy, so that all 200,000 subscribers of the Wall Street Journal followed up to buy books."

At least half of the initial sales and promotion achievements are attributed to the help of Times Group.

After all, both sides are not considered real friends of Gu Ao.

It was after organizing a delegation of American entrepreneurs to China to teach their experience last year and getting deeper into the relationship with Gu Ao, that he felt that some of Gu Ao’s views were reasonable and that he could dig out heavy information, so he was consistent with Gu Ao for profit.

Gu Ao also answered Xiao Sui privately:

"It is obvious that McNamath and the senior executives of Time Media themselves think that the current stock market in the United States is a bit crazy, and everyone's confidence in the cross-generational prosperity of the technology industry is indeed a bit overwhelming.

As a media outlet, you can't catch the eye when you continue to praise along with the flow, because your peers are also praising you. How sure are you to brag more exciting than your peers?

If you can find the right time and sing a big shot in the industry, it will be more reasonable and reasonable, and the media's ratings and circulation will increase. And as long as the big shot himself, it will not have any adverse effects on the media. In contrast, this media resource is nothing."

Xiao Sui seemed to understand but didn't understand, so she no longer questioned and just did things well.

Americans have always been "objective and fair" for high-end media. But this objective and fairness does not mean that the media articles are not allowed to predict mistakes, because if you have to say it right, it will go against your own words, and this is not a matter of speech.

The public's expression of the requirement of "objectivity and fairness" is that your media experts can be wrong, but the person you say must believe what you say and cannot be inconsistent with each other.

For example, to give an extreme example, you, a stock analyst, can just say a stock pill, but as long as you prove that you are saying this, you are also doing short selling operations, and you take the lead instead of letting readers take risks in vernacular ways. Then, even if you make a mistake in your prediction, the media that publishes your comments will not be considered "unobjective" by the public.

As long as the newspaper reports, it comes from the perspective of facts and says that someone thinks about the market, and how he does it... As long as the fact is OK, the readers will judge whether the theory is believed or not.

But if you instigate the public to buy it but you don’t buy it yourself and end up wrong, you have to think about it seriously.

Based on this gameplay, Gu Ao's current attitude is relatively rare.

Because all technology stock company bosses have benefited from the overly optimistic about the issue of "can technology companies survive the technology change" in the public and capital circles.

Technology companies in the U.S. stock market are all benefiting from this blind confidence of the public and enjoying the benefits of the stock price and earnings ratio of several times higher than that of other traditional industries. Whether it is Atari at the peak of that year, Wang An now, or even Microsoft Apple and ibm.

It’s just that ibm is too old-fashioned and benefits are smaller, while Wang An, Apple and Microsoft are more likely to benefit.

So except for Gu Ao, who completely isolated the stock market, no one will stand up and sing to himself.

McNama's idea of ​​making big news that is enough to show his conscience in the industry. He cannot cooperate with Bill Gates, nor with Jobs or Wang An.

In this case, it would be a matter of mutual benefit to treat Gu Ao with courtesy.

There is no relationship, but both sides have their own ulterior motives to get what they need.

...

A huge sales volume of more than 500,000 in less than half a month, of course, instantly caused a huge wave of the relevant industry in the United States.

The short tranquility of more than a week was just because everyone was still reading carefully and had no time to support or squirt. After reading carefully, it was time for the public to resonate with the whole resonance of the public.

Companies in the hard drive and memory industry are the most silent because Gu Ao used some of their cases to whip the corpse. Gu Ao said everything right, and the evidence is as strong as a mountain. What else can I refute?

However, two new storage companies that are still relatively weak now, Seagate and Western Digital (wd, Western Digital), jumped out and announced that they did not cater to mainstream customers in the current minicomputer market. They are very open and willing to equally serve small customers in the not-so-large personal computer market today, providing customization for these small customers.

Seagate and Western Digital also paid for their own money to hold press conferences, or asked the company to interview programs, and talked about their transformational advantages compared to the current hard drive giants in the industry that are more awesome than themselves.

After they did this, the stock prices of Seagate and Western Digital on Nasdaq actually rose in response to the price increase. And a current hard drive industry giant, which was "slandered" by them, "had been tied up by big customers like ibm and lost its innovation ability", was also lowered by several major institutions on Wall Street, and the stock fell for several consecutive days.

With this wave of fluctuations among major companies in the hard drive and memory industry, all retail investors and institutional investors naturally pay more attention to the window paper that Gu Ao broke.

It's so scary. Gu Ao analyzed that some models in the industry have a future, while some models have no future. Then those companies that Gu Ao said have a future rose directly, while those who Gu Ao said had no future fell directly. This is a stronger control than the stock god.

In "The Dilemma of the Innovator", Gu Ao has no good reaction to the second wave of whipping corpses in "The Dilemma of the Innovator", because the second part of the book is the process of Gu Ao killing Atari himself. Atari is now dead and no longer exists, so he will not have to fall.

This is the third industry analyzed in the book, the computer complete industry.

ibm took the lead and emphasized that he had survived several eras and lived with the computer industry. It can be seen that ibm's intergenerational transformation is no problem.

ibm said this, although it was an attempt to take it out of the matter and put it aside, but I didn't expect it to be effective. Everyone temporarily believes that ibm is an exception and can avoid the cycle of technology iteration.

Then the pot was divided by Microsoft, Apple and Wang An, and Intel provided supporting facilities, which were slightly affected.

Microsoft is very comfortable. Bill Gates represents emerging forces. He took the opportunity to promote many subversive concepts of reducing the entry threshold and user costs of the entire industry, and vigorously publicizes the idea of ​​open compatible machine systems.

In other words, Microsoft is happy to jump out and break the window paper, because Microsoft can dress itself up as a role that will ruin others' lives.
Chapter completed!