LabattBlue Posted August 31, 2009 Report Posted August 31, 2009 As I drove by a travel agency the other day I was thinking about how they are even surviving with how easy it is to research and book travel of any kind over the internet. It would seem like it is only a matter of time before more and more travel agencies shutter their doors. The only thing that probably keeps them going for the time being is older generations of people who are not computer savvy and businesses that still rely on a corporate travel agent. It got me thinking though, what other businesses face elimination or become scarce at the hands of the Internet? PS We have two more weeks until training camp and then we can get back to hockey...or we can continue to debate Ek rumors!
nfreeman Posted August 31, 2009 Report Posted August 31, 2009 Newspapers are already going through this.
shrader Posted August 31, 2009 Report Posted August 31, 2009 Is the business really wiped out or does it just start to be run through the internet instead? The best of the pack always find a way to adapt and the smaller and weaker ones can't and eventually fail. That was happening long before the internet came around. But yeah, like nfreeman said, pretty much anything in print is hit hard by the internet.
MattPie Posted August 31, 2009 Report Posted August 31, 2009 It got me thinking though, what other businesses face elimination or become scarce at the hands of the Internet? Encyclopedias Salesman
carpandean Posted August 31, 2009 Report Posted August 31, 2009 Any service that involves a level of trust will last longer than those that do not. This will be especially true, as you say, amongst the older generations. With newspapers, I already don't see the actual writers/editors, so the only level of trust is in the payment and with the delivery person actually getting it to me. Many people pay for their newspapers online, so that isn't much of an advantage, and my computer is more reliable than our delivery person, so there is no advantage there, either. Thus, people go with the cheaper/easier online newspapers. Travel agencies handle a bit more money and have to handle any problems that come up, so there is some level of trust there. However, large reputable internet sites with proven track records will be safe enough for most. Most people, however, still want a brick-and-mortar bank location or insurance agent that they can actually speak with face-to-face, because it gives a feeling of trust with their money or in case of an indecent. While much of the process will be handled online, those physical branches/offices will not go away. Food, too, is not something that most people will trust from an online business. Not that some food won't be sold online, but few people would be comfortable getting everything from those sources. Plus, there are timing issues (spoilage, etc.) that are often present with food. Another group of business that will resist being replaced are those that require trying on before buying. I won't buy shoes online, even if it is exactly the same make/model/size, because small variations in production (third-world children are so imprecise :bag: ) mean that I need to try it on first. That is hard to do online with current technology. Most clothes fall into that same category. Of course, my gf subscribes to the "order it online and return it if it doesn't fit" philosophy, but many will not. Other than that, most online businesses benefit from economies of scale in operations, reduced overhead, expanded market size, etc., that give them advantages that their local equivalents can't match. It's an extension of the national corporations overtaking Mom-and-Pop shops phenomenon that we saw in recent generations.
wjag Posted August 31, 2009 Report Posted August 31, 2009 College Professors Bank tellers Postmen Phone Books DJs Help Desk Operators Some sooner than later for sure, but all are endangered.
carpandean Posted August 31, 2009 Report Posted August 31, 2009 College Professors Some sooner than later for sure, but all are endangered. College Professors will not be replaced. As Shrader said, the best companies (universities, here) will adapt and take advantage of the internet. Every major university already offers or is working on online courses. However, the content of those courses is the property of the professors, not the universities. A university cannot record a course, get rid of the professor and then simply replay the online course. It doesn't work that way (at least, it doesn't at the three universities that I've been involved with.) One might assume that, at least, the use of online courses would allow them to handle bigger classes. This, too, is also unlikely. Most universities could offer larger sections of physical courses, too, but choose not to. It's not because of the limits of the class rooms -- they can make and often already have bigger rooms -- it's because the professors actually have to interact with the students to get the most out of learning. They need to make students think by asking them to answer questions and they need to be able to respond when students have their own questions. Having an online course does not make this any less true or any easier to handle for large classes. With most online courses, in fact, you have a professor online as the content is played. The advantage is simply that neither the students nor the professor actually has to be in a specific location. Lastly, it should be noted, that online or not, a degree from Harvard still carries more weight than one from the University of Phoenix (no offense meant to anyone; these were simply easy examples to pick.) Those best universities will still be more desirable and they will still need and hire the best professors. That will not change. Actually, I lied, was not lastly. I have a couple of more points: Firstly, most "real" universities are accredited, which adds value to the degree that they offer by insuring that certain standard are met. That accreditation process has a substantial number of requirements that will still need to be met, online or not. Those requirements already mandate the minimum standards for hiring faculty (e.g., what qualifies as academically vs. professionally qualified to teach and what percentages of each you are allowed to have.) In fact, if it's not there already, I would bet that the accreditation process will soon include special requirements for online courses that might actually be stricter than their physical counterparts due to the reduced level of control that the universities have (for example, you can't easily monitor whether students are cheating.) Secondly, a major component of a professor's job is research. This is more true in some fields, but is almost universally true across all areas. This portion of the job requires the specialized and intense training (usually doctorate level), as well as experience, that can't be replaced by anyone else online. Generally, online universities represent a threat mostly to the lower level universities. The top 80-90% (rough guess) will adapt to included some online content, but will otherwise be unaffected. The demand for qualified faculty will not fall and, in fact, will probably continue to rise.
LabattBlue Posted August 31, 2009 Author Report Posted August 31, 2009 Playboy Magazine is all but dead. :blush:
Eleven Posted August 31, 2009 Report Posted August 31, 2009 College Professors will not be replaced. [snip] You're right, but I'm distressed to see the number of colleges and universities that are relying on online courses. That's no way to encourage the free flow of ideas (and beverages) that are essential to higher education. And what do you professors propose to do about Playboy?
wjag Posted August 31, 2009 Report Posted August 31, 2009 College Professors will not be replaced. As Shrader said, the best companies (universities, here) will adapt and take advantage of the internet. Every major university already offers or is working on online courses. However, the content of those courses is the property of the professors, not the universities. A university cannot record a course, get rid of the professor and then simply replay the online course. It doesn't work that way (at least, it doesn't at the three universities that I've been involved with.) One might assume that, at least, the use of online courses would allow them to handle bigger classes. This, too, is also unlikely. Most universities could offer larger sections of physical courses, too, but choose not to. It's not because of the limits of the class rooms -- they can make and often already have bigger rooms -- it's because the professors actually have to interact with the students to get the most out of learning. They need to make students think by asking them to answer questions and they need to be able to respond when students have their own questions. Having an online course does not make this any less true or any easier to handle for large classes. With most online courses, in fact, you have a professor online as the content is played. The advantage is simply that neither the students nor the professor actually has to be in a specific location. Lastly, it should be noted, that online or not, a degree from Harvard still carries more weight than one from the University of Phoenix (no offense meant to anyone; these were simply easy examples to pick.) Those best universities will still be more desirable and they will still need and hire the best professors. That will not change. Actually, I lied, was not lastly. I have a couple of more points: Firstly, most "real" universities are accredited, which adds value to the degree that they offer by insuring that certain standard are met. That accreditation process has a substantial number of requirements that will still need to be met, online or not. Those requirements already mandate the minimum standards for hiring faculty (e.g., what qualifies as academically vs. professionally qualified to teach and what percentages of each you are allowed to have.) In fact, if it's not there already, I would bet that the accreditation process will soon include special requirements for online courses that might actually be stricter than their physical counterparts due to the reduced level of control that the universities have (for example, you can't easily monitor whether students are cheating.) Secondly, a major component of a professor's job is research. This is more true in some fields, but is almost universally true across all areas. This portion of the job requires the specialized and intense training (usually doctorate level), as well as experience, that can't be replaced by anyone else online. Generally, online universities represent a threat mostly to the lower level universities. The top 80-90% (rough guess) will adapt to included some online content, but will otherwise be unaffected. The demand for qualified faculty will not fall and, in fact, will probably continue to rise. Ye "doth protest too much, methinks".. I've seen Star Trek.. You will be replaced by some AI applications sooner or later and they will be delivered over the internet...
SwampD Posted August 31, 2009 Report Posted August 31, 2009 Recording Companies. No big loss. CD duplication houses. Everyone listens to MP3s even though CDs sound WAY better. Radio Stations.
carpandean Posted August 31, 2009 Report Posted August 31, 2009 Ye "doth protest too much, methinks".. I've seen Star Trek.. You will be replaced by some AI applications sooner or later and they will be delivered over the internet... Oh yeah, well I've seen Terminator. The machines will rise up and wipe us all out long before AI professors replace human ones on the internet.
Mbossy Posted August 31, 2009 Report Posted August 31, 2009 Aren't we all part of the Matrix already? Drinkin' Kool-Aid and pissin' vinegar?
nobody Posted August 31, 2009 Report Posted August 31, 2009 Oh yeah, well I've seen Terminator. The machines will rise up and wipe us all out long before AI professors replace human ones on the internet. Plus we all can go back in time before the AI professors happen.
frisky Posted August 31, 2009 Report Posted August 31, 2009 Adult video stores. Just the ones with videos only though. Not the ones with novelties. But, just the video only ones.
Sabre Dance Posted August 31, 2009 Report Posted August 31, 2009 Newspapers will never go belly up completely. Did you ever try to wrap fish in your laptop? Train your dog to go on your iPhone? Line a birdcage with a file server? (OK, I'm done). Seriously, though...I spend 8 hours a day in front of a computer screen. If I want to read for pleasure, I want a newspaper, book or a magazine in my hands.
ROC Sabres Posted August 31, 2009 Report Posted August 31, 2009 Playboy Magazine is all but dead. I was going to say phone sex operators. Also there is the video star. When you think about all the shituff that has been on MTV for the last 8 or 9 years and how they have moved to tv shows and less music, you would have to think that they knew it was coming. -I forgot how to embed the youtube video so sorry for the extra tab.
henysgol Posted September 1, 2009 Report Posted September 1, 2009 I was going to say phone sex operators. Also there is the video star. When you think about all the shituff that has been on MTV for the last 8 or 9 years and how they have moved to tv shows and less music, you would have to think that they knew it was coming. -I forgot how to embed the youtube video so sorry for the extra tab. Yea, adult videos and magazines are definitely on their way out. Just about everyone who is a patron of the adult entertainment industry gets it from the internet these days. Plain old movie rental places are also on their way out. Netflix, Tivo, and all the other online media providers are burying them. And Amazon.com, thank you! The internet saves me so much gas!
nfreeman Posted September 1, 2009 Report Posted September 1, 2009 Aren't we all part of the Matrix already? Drinkin' Kool-Aid and pissin' vinegar? Well, that would explain a lot. If we have to be in the Matrix, couldn't someone program the GD thing to make us think the Sabres won the cup? Newspapers will never go belly up completely. Did you ever try to wrap fish in your laptop? Train your dog to go on your iPhone? Line a birdcage with a file server? (OK, I'm done). Seriously, though...I spend 8 hours a day in front of a computer screen. If I want to read for pleasure, I want a newspaper, book or a magazine in my hands. I like newspapers too, but they are in dire shape. The Boston Globe is literally on life support -- and if it can happen to that paper (which I don't have much use for, but it's still a major newspaper), it can happy to any of them.
McJeff215 Posted September 1, 2009 Report Posted September 1, 2009 Is the business really wiped out or does it just start to be run through the internet instead? The best of the pack always find a way to adapt and the smaller and weaker ones can't and eventually fail. That was happening long before the internet came around. But yeah, like nfreeman said, pretty much anything in print is hit hard by the internet. Cable & Sat. shops, probably most forms of entertainment eventually. That said, one thing that the Internet does is enable worldwide distribution for any business. That's a mixed blessing. It puts Joe's Travel Shop on the same playing field as Expedia and Travelocity. Local business aren't just getting stomped out by a brick-and-mortar Walmart, they're getting squished due to the cost models behind pay-per-click, affiliate programs, and acquiring Internet leads. Google "Book Store." Borders. Barnes and Noble. Books-a-Million. The only reason any locals show up is because Google ads a specific section for local businesses. The big guys don't have to even have a local presence to make life difficult for the little guys. They just have to bid more on keywords or offer lucrative affiliate packages. Things that the local shops just can't do. Now, *that* said, it does open up a whole new technology based market... so it's not necessarily a bad thing. Joe's Travel Shop still has an opportunity to sell to a broader audience. The issue now is whether he's able to capitalize on that.
Eleven Posted September 1, 2009 Report Posted September 1, 2009 Cable & Sat. shops, probably most forms of entertainment eventually. That said, one thing that the Internet does is enable worldwide distribution for any business. That's a mixed blessing. It puts Joe's Travel Shop on the same playing field as Expedia and Travelocity. Local business aren't just getting stomped out by a brick-and-mortar Walmart, they're getting squished due to the cost models behind pay-per-click, affiliate programs, and acquiring Internet leads. Google "Book Store." Borders. Barnes and Noble. Books-a-Million. The only reason any locals show up is because Google ads a specific section for local businesses. The big guys don't have to even have a local presence to make life difficult for the little guys. They just have to bid more on keywords or offer lucrative affiliate packages. Things that the local shops just can't do. Now, *that* said, it does open up a whole new technology based market... so it's not necessarily a bad thing. Joe's Travel Shop still has an opportunity to sell to a broader audience. The issue now is whether he's able to capitalize on that. Yeah, but it can help smaller businesses, too. Take a restaurant that just opened on Elmwood. I can search for "juniper elmwood buffalo" and come up with the address & cross-street, phone number, and menu instantly. They don't have to wait for the next edition of the phone book to be published in order to get their address and number out there, and they get to put their menu and photos online. (Eating there for the first time tonight, because the menu looked good!) I also can check out and book classes at my local, non-chain gym, and if I want to know the hours of that local bookstore, I just search for "talking leaves buffalo" and I'm all set. I think local businesses have figured out how to use the net; they're at the same competitive disadvantage that they were at in, say, 1995, but their situation isn't as bleak as it was in 2002.
McJeff215 Posted September 1, 2009 Report Posted September 1, 2009 Yeah, but it can help smaller businesses, too. Take a restaurant that just opened on Elmwood. I can search for "juniper elmwood buffalo" and come up with the address & cross-street, phone number, and menu instantly. They don't have to wait for the next edition of the phone book to be published in order to get their address and number out there, and they get to put their menu and photos online. (Eating there for the first time tonight, because the menu looked good!) I also can check out and book classes at my local, non-chain gym, and if I want to know the hours of that local bookstore, I just search for "talking leaves buffalo" and I'm all set. I think local businesses have figured out how to use the net; they're at the same competitive disadvantage that they were at in, say, 1995, but their situation isn't as bleak as it was in 2002. Yup, sure it can, especially if the local business owner is experienced enough to take advantage of it (or hire someone who does it for a living). Getting information about local business easily can really be helpful and boost their sales quite a bit. It allows easier access to customers, opens the door to a huge marketplace, and allows you to compete for the same customer base that the big boys fight over.
Sabre Dance Posted September 1, 2009 Report Posted September 1, 2009 I like newspapers too, but they are in dire shape. The Boston Globe is literally on life support -- and if it can happen to that paper (which I don't have much use for, but it's still a major newspaper), it can happy to any of them. I think the problem is that the newspapers haven't learned how to properly publish on the internet. You don't allow users to visit your site and just read your articles for free (even if the pages are loaded with ads). You show headlines and if anyone wants to read the whole article, they have to buy a subscription or pay for a single day's access (just like if you were getting the paper delivered to your house or buying it at a newsstand). Yeah, but it can help smaller businesses, too. Take a restaurant that just opened on Elmwood. I can search for "juniper elmwood buffalo" and come up with the address & cross-street, phone number, and menu instantly. They don't have to wait for the next edition of the phone book to be published in order to get their address and number out there, and they get to put their menu and photos online. (Eating there for the first time tonight, because the menu looked good!) I agree - I do this all the time. However, I find it interesting (and counterintuitive) that online phone book sites generally have entries that are out of date........ :blink:
Eleven Posted September 2, 2009 Report Posted September 2, 2009 I agree - I do this all the time. However, I find it interesting (and counterintuitive) that online phone book sites generally have entries that are out of date........ :blink: The online phone book sites have little financial interest in keeping up-to-date. The business itself, though, should have an up-to-date site.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.