Life Notes #31: Presentation Sequel: Title Turnaround

The following week, I was scheduled to do the same presentation at another marketing conference – this time in San Diego. My disastrous NY experience meant that I could not use the same title. I clearly needed something very different.

Looking back at what had gone wrong in New York, I realised the issue wasn’t just the delivery; it was about connecting with the audience at a more visceral level. The parallel session that had been taking place when I spoke on “Profitless to Profipoly: Re-engineering Retention with AI Twins and Email Apps” was titled “Your Post-Purchase Flow Is Terrible. Here’s Why.” I remember glancing at it and realising that it resonated more immediately. Taking a dispassionate view, it was clear which title seemed more attractive and likely to grab attention. Titles matter. They set expectations and draw people in before you’ve even had the chance to speak.

With this in mind, I decided to scrap my original title and take a new approach. My revised title? “Your Acquisition Strategy Sucks! 3 AI-Powered Fixes You Need Now.”  There were five critical reasons why I settled on this title (with a little help from the AIs, of course).

First, I learned the hard way that you must start where the audience is, not where you want them to be. It’s a fundamental principle of communication, yet one I had overlooked in my eagerness to share my vision. Customer acquisition is the primary obsession of marketing teams, not retention. So, instead of leading with retention (which should come later), I led with acquisition. It’s always easier to hook people in with something they’re already anxious about. It’s like fishing – you bait the hook with what the fish wants, not what you think they should eat.

Second, the title needed to be bold and hard-hitting. “Your Acquisition Strategy Sucks” isn’t just a statement; it’s a challenge. It triggers a visceral reaction, which is exactly what’s needed to cut through the noise at a crowded conference. In a sea of polite, jargon-filled titles, this one promised to deliver some hard truths. It’s provocative, maybe even a bit uncomfortable, but that’s what creates engagement. In fact, a colleague overheard an attendee tell another at the lunch table, “This is a session I want to attend. Rising cost of acquisition is a serious problem in my company.” This anecdote perfectly illustrated the power of addressing a pain point head-on.

Third, while the first half grabs attention, the second half offers a solution. It’s not enough to point out the flaws; you must also promise a way out. That’s where “3 AI-Powered Fixes You Need Now” came in. It’s not just pointing out a problem; it’s promising specific, countable solutions. There’s something psychologically appealing about the number three – it’s manageable, memorable, and implies a comprehensive approach without being overwhelming.

Fourth, let’s face it – AI is the buzzword of the moment. If AI is in the title, you’ve already given your talk a major head start because it’s what everyone wants to hear about. AI is synonymous with modern, cutting-edge solutions, and anything less would seem dated. Everyone’s talking about AI, everyone’s curious about it, and everyone’s a bit anxious about being left behind. By prominently featuring AI, I’m signalling that this talk is cutting-edge, relevant, and potentially game-changing.

Finally, the title had to suggest immediate actionability. The promise of “3 AI-powered fixes you need now” creates a sense of urgency, implying that these aren’t just theoretical concepts or future possibilities, but solutions that can be implemented right away. In a world where marketers are constantly bombarded with new ideas and strategies, the promise of something they can act on immediately is incredibly appealing.

This new title was a complete departure from my original approach. It was less about educating and more about provoking. Less about my vision and more about their pain points. It was a calculated risk, but one that I hoped would fill the room and create the engagement I needed to eventually lead them to the ideas of retention re-engineering and the path to becoming a profipoly.

It worked. I had a full room. (The competition in this case was not another session, but the amazing weather and views right outside the conference room; it was San Diego after all.)

**

The experience with the two presentations became a valuable turning point. It has reignited my passion for the art of communication and reminded me of the ever-present need to connect with our audience on their terms, not just ours. As I move forward, I carry with me a renewed appreciation for the delicate balance between innovation and accessibility, between complexity and appeal. In the end, this lesson in humility may prove to be the most valuable presentation I could have given – to myself.

Thinks 1362

Alexander Sukharevsky: “The way to look at this is that generative AI, essentially, is the most convenient human interface to apply other AI techniques. And therefore, it’s all about interface; be it interface with a database, be it interface with other algorithms, be it even interface between different generative AI applications. I think if you fast-forward…you will see more and more autonomous virtual agents communicating with each other to solve different tasks under strict human supervision to properly manage risk as well as to ensure that the quality of deliverables is going to be up to the standards that we’re looking for. Therefore, while currently we’re seeing mostly interaction that is human versus machine, as we develop, we’re going to see more and more machine-to-machine interactions to solve different tasks. Now we’re not talking about superintelligence or AGI [artificial general intelligence]; we are years away from that moment. At the same time, we’ll see very sophisticated, very niche assistants that will help us to do our job better, faster, and more precisely.”

John Battelle: “There’s simply no way Google would push its generative AI models directly into the cash cow of search if it wasn’t certain it could make money – and a lot of it – from doing so. And despite my earlier predictions that Google would pivot to a subscription-based model for AI, the only conclusion one can draw is this: Just like PayPal, and just like streaming, AI is going to be driven by ads. Lots, and lots, and lots of ads.”

NYTimes: “In “Making Sense of Chaos,” [Doyne] Farmer writes that in mainstream models, the economy always tends toward equilibrium, like a rocking horse that rocks when it’s whacked with a stick but eventually settles down (to use the analogy of the Swedish economist Knut Wicksell, who died in 1926). In fact, Farmer argues, a lot of the economy’s ups and downs come from internal forces, not external ones. As a result, the economy never settles down into a quiet equilibrium. It behaves chaotically. Chaos to Farmer isn’t a messy sock drawer. It has two qualities: sensitive dependence on initial conditions, such that a tiny change in how things start off can lead to dramatic differences in what happens later; and endogenous motion — the notion that the system never settles because it generates its own churning. Importantly, Farmer says, chaos is not synonymous with unpredictability: “On one hand, chaos imposes fundamental limits to long-term prediction; on the other, it means that data that otherwise look random can be predictable in the short term.””

Claudio Feser, author of Super Deciders: The Science and Practice of Making Decisions in Dynamic and Uncertain Times: “Generally, we unconsciously go through the process of simplifying the situation, making predictions, and applying heuristics. The limbic and striatum systems are also where our memories, our habits, and our experiences are stored. Our past experiences, biases, and inclinations often shape how we see reality, how we frame the problem, what exploit–explore options we see, and how we then work through that problem…The general framework is all about a process that is largely unconscious, whereby the brain does a lot of work using past experiences. Making “super decisions” is going through the very same process that the brain will go through anyway in a conscious, deliberate way, because it allows you to see many more options, make better predictions, and ultimately make significantly better decisions.”

Life Notes #30: A Humbling Lesson in Marketing

In the heart of New York City, I found myself facing an unexpected challenge. I had come to share groundbreaking ideas at a marketing conference. My topic, “Profitless to Profipoly: Re-engineering Retention with AI Twins and Email Apps,” seemed, to me, a beacon of innovation in the marketing world. Little did I know that I was about to receive a stark lesson in the very field I thought I had mastered.

The conference hall buzzed with energy as attendees flocked to various sessions. My anticipation was palpable as I prepared to unveil concepts that I believed could revolutionise customer retention strategies – and eventually brand profits. However, as I stood ready to present, a harsh reality set in. The room, capable of hosting a hundred, held merely ten. The contrast was stark and humbling – a parallel session, with the enticing title “Your post purchase flow is terrible. Here’s why,” had drawn a crowd over ten times larger.

I watched, a mix of disappointment and realisation washing over me, as people streamed out of the room at the end of the previous session. Their choices were clear – they were voting with their feet, and the verdict was not in my favour. The scale of my misjudgment hit me like a tidal wave. I had committed a cardinal sin in marketing: I had failed to market myself and my ideas effectively.

In my eagerness to share complex, innovative concepts, I had overlooked a fundamental principle – the need for an appealing, accessible pitch. My session title, while descriptive and meaningful to me, had failed to resonate with the broader audience. It was a classic case of losing sight of the forest for the trees.

This experience served as a powerful reminder that even the most groundbreaking ideas need effective packaging and promotion. Innovation alone is not enough; it must be coupled with the ability to capture attention and spark curiosity. I had assumed that the merit of my ideas would speak for itself, forgetting that in a world inundated with information, the first challenge is simply to be heard.

The magnitude of this missed opportunity was not lost on me. It wasn’t just a personal setback but a lost chance for Netcore to showcase its cutting-edge thinking and tech innovations. I had envisioned pioneering new approaches to profitability and customer retention, but instead found myself grappling with a fundamental lesson in audience engagement.

This experience underscored a crucial truth: in the realm of ideas, presentation is as vital as content. Even the most revolutionary concepts need a compelling sales pitch. People make split-second decisions based on first impressions, and I had failed to make mine count.

As I reflected on this experience, I realised that when faced with such significant missteps, incremental changes are insufficient. This situation called for a complete rethinking of my approach to presenting ideas. It was a reminder that as marketers, we must constantly apply our skills not just to our products or services, but to ourselves and our ideas as well.

I had an opportunity waiting a few days later.

Thinks 1361

NYTimes: “[Sweden] has a roster of high-tech entrepreneurs that is the envy of its neighbors. Spotify and Skype are globally recognized brand names. Klarna, a financial tech firm, and King Digital Entertainment, the maker of the video game juggernaut Candy Crush, are other examples of homegrown tech powerhouses. “They have something — particularly in the tech sector — which other European countries do not really have to the same extent,” said Jacob Kirkegaard, a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund. That entrepreneurial track record has been attracting renewed attention at a time when anxieties are mounting about Europe’s ability to compete with American and Chinese advancements in high technology.”

Niranjan Rrajadhyaksha: “A country can move from low-income to lower middle-income status with minimal changes in its employment structure. People can climb the income ladder by being slightly more productive in their existing jobs. The shift from lower middle-income to upper-middle income status involves a major shift in the employment structure, or the reallocation of labour on a large scale. The best vehicle for this is young and dynamic firms that are keen to take on more workers. Firm dynamism is an underrated issue in the ongoing discussion on how the Indian economy can provide jobs for a growing workforce that aspires to move ahead in life.”

Naushad Forbes: “Three manufacturing sectors can create jobs by the million: Apparel, food, and electronic assembly.  Our apparel sector has long languished with little attention paid to it. Let’s talk to them and ask them what it would take to scale by a factor of ten. Just as we have attracted Foxconn to India, let’s try to do the same with Li and Fung, the world’s largest apparel company that indirectly employed 1 million people in China.  A large garment factory in Bangladesh employs 30,000 – 50,000 people; in India, it is only 3,000 – 5,000.  What would help them grow?  Design and technology?  Skills on the shopfloor?  Tariff-free access to markets through free-trade agreements? Labour reform? Hiring seasonal labour more easily? In food processing, we are still a small player by international standards. We grow over 20 per cent of the fruit and vegetables in the world but process, Deloitte tells us, 4.5 per cent of our fruit and 2.7 per cent of our vegetables. We could dominate world markets for both. Electronic assembly is a new success story. We are finally seeing large labour-intensive factories being set up by Tata Electronics, Foxconn and Pegatron. Set up under the production linked incentive (PLI) scheme, electronics assembly is the only one of the 14 PLI sectors that is labour-intensive…An effective jobs strategy demands a sectoral focus on labour-intensive industries.”

Karen Lynch: “Our job as managers or leaders is to really coach people to their top performance. Think about athletes. Athletes have coaches for everything to sharpen their skills. That’s how we have to think about our colleagues. Giving them coaching feedback is really intended to sharpen their skills and make them even better. It’s not to be hurtful, and it’s not to give negative feedback. It’s really to have them sharpen what they’re trying to do. Now, the flip side, which I also talk about in the book: feedback is a gift. I always tell people that feedback’s a gift; coaching is a gift. You can choose whatever you want to do with it. Try it on, see if it fits. If it doesn’t, you don’t have to do it. But our job as leaders and managers is to help people achieve their goals, be it the next promotion or being the best individual contributor they can be. And it is their choice on which direction they want to go. Our job is to help coach and guide them to be the best performers they can be.”

Jaspreet Bindra: “Let us look at the Generative AI ‘stack,’ or the layers that make up this technology…The lowest layer of the stack (let’s call it Layer 1) is formed by AI infrastructure. Infra providers include companies like Nvidia and AMD, which make the powerful graphics processing units (GPUs), which in turn make the Large Language Models (LLMs) of GenAI work…The Layer 2 above the infrastructural base is the model layer, the one grabbing all the eyeballs right now. This comprises OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Meta and others, companies which make the LLMs that seem to do magical things for us—ChatGPT, Claude, Llama, Gemini, etc. If the infra layer spouts out money, the model layer consumes most of it. Layer 3 above those models comprises development platforms, which are used by developers to build applications on top of LLMs. Usually nestled in large clouds like Azure and AWS, this is the investment that Big Tech firms make to get applications built on top of them. Layer 4 is the application layer. This is where innovation abounds, with startups and big companies building their own focused GenAI apps on top of powerful LLMs created by companies like Meta and OpenAI.”

Life Notes #29: Sweet Memories

On the flight from Mumbai to NY, I was doing what I like best on long-hauls: listening to songs stored offline via Amazon Prime and my Bose headset, and thinking and writing in my notebook. Mine was the only overhead light shining. For me, flights are the best thinking pods ever created. (And I really hope Air India doesn’t do Wi-Fi on their US non-stops!)

A young woman from a few rows behind walked up to me and said, “I have been observing you and you write so much. What do you write? I don’t see too many people writing, so am curious to know.” I then explained to her about my writing habits and also a bit about me. I also gave her a copy of my book.

I have had this experience more than a few times. People asking what I write and who I am. Most mistake me to be a writer of some sort. (Which in a way I am.) And that made me wonder, why don’t more people write? Our mind is always active. We are observing the world around. Ideas come up. Not all may be actionable, but just writing them keeps the mind free.

But I was happy that the woman was curious and bold to come and ask me! (And observant.)

Here is a second story from my US travels. I was carrying a few of my books from our office to my hotel room to pack for the next event we were doing in San Diego. In the hotel elevator, a middle-aged woman (probably around my age) saw me with the books (all with the same title), “What are those books? Are they yours?” And I said, “Yes. I wrote a book on entrepreneurship, and these are for a conference.” She replied, “My son wants to become an entrepreneur. He has many ideas. Any suggestions for him?” I answered, “Focus on the problem. Ask him to find a problem that people have and which he can solve uniquely. That could be his company.” She thanked me and we parted.

A couple days later, we again met in the elevator. (What’s the probability of a second chance meeting?!) This time, her son was with her. She recognised me and introduced her son. I recommended to him Uri Levine’s book, “Fall in Love with the Problem, not the Solution.” I wished him luck.

Life is sometimes about these short sweet moments with strangers which bring a smile. Our paths will probably never cross again, but in that briefest of engagements, we have shared something and created a memory. And perhaps helped each other become better. These fleeting interactions, though seemingly insignificant, often leave lasting impressions that enrich our lives in unexpected ways. They remind us of the interconnectedness of human experiences and the potential for growth in every encounter.

In a world increasingly dominated by digital interactions, these spontaneous, face-to-face exchanges become even more precious. They challenge us to remain open, curious, and engaged with the world around us. Whether it’s a conversation sparked by a simple observation or a chance meeting that leads to sharing knowledge, these moments serve as gentle reminders of our shared humanity. They encourage us to look beyond our immediate circles and recognise the potential for learning and connection in every interaction.

In sharing our thoughts and experiences with others, we not only potentially impact their lives but also reinforce our own beliefs and values. It’s a beautiful reciprocity that enriches both parties involved, creating ripples of positivity that extend far beyond the moment itself.

Thinks 1360

David Brooks: “Today we still live in a society overly besotted with raw brainpower. Our schools sort children according to their ability to do well on standardized tests, slighting the kind of wisdom held in the body that is just as important for navigating life. Our economic models are based on the idea that humans are rational creatures coolly calculating their self-interest, and then we are surprised when investors whip themselves into the frenzy of a stock market bubble. A lot of people are estranged from their own inner lives because they don’t know how their emotions function. I look at all the sadness and meanness in the world and conclude that we’re just not good at building healthy emotional connections.”

TJ Newman: “As scary as the stories are that I write, the essence of them, the absolute heart and essence of my stories, is everyday people in an extraordinary circumstance rising to meet the moment. I deeply believe in the everyday hero in all of us, and that ordinary people only need the opportunity to be the heroes that they actually are.”

Gita Gopinath: “If India continues on the path of serious reforms, and it will require large scale reforms and on multiple fronts, then you know, this growth can be maintained. It can be increased, and certainly per capita incomes will then, will then rise. But again, it’s important for growth to come along with a lot of job creation. We ran some numbers, and if you look at what is needed in terms of additional job creation in India between now and 2030 cumulatively is, you know, anywhere between 60 million and 148 million. That will not happen if you just focus on a couple of sectors or particular areas. It’s going to require broad based growth across the different sectors.”

Jonathan Rauch: “[Liberalism’s] central philosophy is that all persons are born free and equal. Its operational principles include the rule of law, pluralism, toleration, minority rights, distributed authority, limited government, and (subject to the other requirements) democratic decision-making. Its distinctive method of social organization is to rely on impersonal rules and open-ended, decentralized processes to make collective decisions…Finally: the challengers are authoritarian. Liberalism is the only method of large-scale social decision-making that is inherently decentralized, depersonalized, consensual, and self-correcting. It understands that humans can be ambitious, biased, and greedy, but it protects us from our worst selves by using checks and balances to restrain ambition, experiment and criticism to identify bias, and the profit motive to domesticate greed. By contrast, while the illiberal and post-liberal contenders come in many varieties, they all, at the end of the day, require the elevation of a person or party to godlike status. In the end, they serve whomever is most ambitious, most biased, and most greedy.” [via Arnold Kling]

Life Notes #28: Two US trips, 30 Years Apart

Labour Day (US) weekends have become an unexpected milestone in my entrepreneurial journey, bookending two pivotal moments in my career, three decades apart.

In 1994, I found myself in the Bay Area around Labour Day, grappling with the challenges of a struggling entrepreneur. Two years prior, I had returned to India with grand ambitions of building a software products business, only to face a series of setbacks. My confidence was at its nadir, and while I had a few nascent ideas, the path forward remained obscure. The trip was a desperate search for direction, a lifeline for my floundering entrepreneurial dreams.

Fast forward to 2024, and I find myself in the US, again around Labor Day, in a starkly different position. Netcore, the company I’ve nurtured, has reached the impressive milestone of $100 million in revenue with healthy profitability. Yet, the road to $200 million and beyond seems shrouded in some uncertainty. Our growth, while steady, has decelerated from the heady days of 2020-2023. The market landscape has evolved, with competition intensifying in our core sectors. Once again, I find myself at a crossroads, seeking that elusive ‘next big thing’ to propel us forward.

The parallels between these two trips, separated by three decades, are striking. Both journeys are quests for innovation, born from the recognition that past strategies have perhaps reached their limits. However, the contrasts are equally significant. In 1994, I was a fledgling entrepreneur, my resume a litany of failures, desperately seeking my first breakthrough. Now, in 2024, I stand as a seasoned ‘proficorn’ business leader with numerous successes under my belt, yet facing the equally daunting challenge of scaling to new heights.

The 1994 trip bore fruit in the form of IndiaWorld, India’s pioneering web portal. This time, my mind buzzes with fresh concepts: re-engineering retention; reimagining email with Atomic Rewards (Mu), Email apps (Epps), ActionAds; AI Twins; and Kaizen services (Progency). Could this constellation of ideas form the bedrock of a new marketing paradigm, one that drives sustainable, profitable growth for businesses in the AI age?

What I’ve come to appreciate about these US trips is the mental space they provide. Removed from the daily grind of Mumbai operations, my mind is free to wander, connecting disparate dots and stumbling upon unexpected synergies. There’s rarely a single ‘Eureka’ moment; instead, it’s a series of micro-realisations, gradually coalescing into a coherent vision.

As I reflect on this journey, I’m struck by the profound changes in the technological landscape. The 1994 trip coincided with the dawn of the Internet era; now, in 2024, we stand at the threshold of the AI Age. Throughout these three decades, technology has been my constant fascination, a flame that shows no sign of dimming. What excites me is that I remain at the forefront of this revolution, still burning with the passion to make a meaningful impact on the world.

The juxtaposition of these two Labour Day trips serves as a poignant reminder of my entrepreneurial evolution. From a struggling dreamer to a successful innovator, the core drive remains unchanged: the relentless pursuit of the next big idea. As I navigate this latest chapter, I’m filled with a sense of anticipation. The challenges may have changed, but the thrill of innovation and the potential to reshape industries continue to fuel my entrepreneurial spirit.

Thinks 1359

WSJ: “Protectionism and industrial policy misallocate resources and reduce economic efficiency. When firms in a free market produce outputs that consumers won’t buy, the money entrepreneurs and investors lose is their own. When protectionists and industrial-policy planners make mistakes, they often mask them with more subsidies and tariffs—at taxpayers’ expense. Think, in the first case, of Ford: When Americans didn’t buy the Edsel, the company lost money and stopped selling the model. Conversely, when Americans haven’t bought heavily subsidized electric vehicles, the government has imposed tariffs on EV imports—taxes that consumers pay. Adam Smith was on to something when he wrote: “Consumption is the sole end and purpose of all production; and the interest of the producer ought to be attended to only so far as it may be necessary for promoting that of the consumer.””

NYMag: “One problem with using AI to summarize everything is that it gets stuff wrong — not most of the time, but far more than you’d want in the roles it’s playing (paralegal, nurse aide, personal assistant, intern). Another problem is that if the products I’ve been testing recently are any indication, the plan is to summarize lots of things, many of which are already in some way summarized, having been produced with brevity and a specific audience in mind.”

The Atlantic: “Even if generative AI is a bubble, that still doesn’t mean all this investment is for nought. Chatbots seem unlikely to yield $600 billion in annual revenue in the next few years, but that doesn’t mean other sorts of AI won’t transform society by 2040, or some decade after that. The spending frenzy might just be far too concentrated and far too early. Amazon, Google, Meta, and Microsoft burning hundreds of billions of dollars to build data centers means future tech start-ups might be able to use those computing resources at lower costs. For now, attitude is more important than any product—that tech companies are willing to spend so much is their proof that AI will pay off. And perhaps even more important in Silicon Valley than a messianic belief in AI is a terrible fear of missing out. “In the tech industry, what drives part of this is nobody wants to be left behind. Nobody wants to be seen as lagging,” Joshi said. Amazon, Google, Meta, and Microsoft are defending their empires. Go all in on AI, the thinking goes, or someone else will. Their actions evince “a sense of desperation,” Cahn writes. “If you do not move now, you will never get another chance.” Enormous sums of money are likely to continue flowing into AI for the foreseeable future, driven by a mix of unshakable confidence and all-consuming fear.”

Eugenia Kuyda: “Replika is an AI friend. You can create and talk to it anytime you need to talk to someone. It’s there for you. It’s there to bring a little positivity to your life to talk about anything that’s on your mind…My belief is that there will be a lot of flavors of AI. People will have assistants, they will have agents that are helping them at work, and then, at the same time, there will be agents or AIs that are there for you outside of work. People want to spend quality time together, they want to talk to someone, they want to watch TV with someone, they want to play video games with someone, they want to go for walks with someone, and that’s what Replika is for.”

Life Notes #27: My Notebook, My Twin

On the flight to New York, I started reading a book, “The Notebook: A History of Thinking on Paper” by Roland Allen. I had read a Wall Street Journal review about the book. As someone who keeps a notebook and still makes notes and thinks on paper, the book was too good to resist!

From the review: “A fresh notebook exudes strange power. If you have ever opened one, perhaps while sitting at a sidewalk cafe, you will know the rising sense of possibility that comes with what Mr. Allen calls “the infinite potential of the blank page.” It is as though the unmarked paper is summoning something—an idea, a verse, a drawing—that might otherwise have stayed inside your head, undeveloped. A notebook thus becomes an extension of the self. Perhaps it is your deep personal self and you are writing down your emotions and experiences in a diary (or “egodocument,” as present-day academics have it). Perhaps it is your professional maritime self and you are documenting longitude and latitude in a ship’s log on a sea journey; or perhaps it is any number of aspects of yourself expressed in one of the other variants of notebook that Mr. Allen has discovered.”

From the book’s introduction: “You don’t need me to tell you what a Moleskine looks like, but you may not have considered how insistently its design sends messages to the ‘Contemporary Nomad’. The minimal black cover looks, at first glance, like it might be leather: robust, but also luxurious. The non-standard dimensions, a couple of centimetres narrower than the familiar A5, let you slip the notebook into a jacket pocket, and the rounded corners – which add considerably to the production cost – help with this. They also stop your pages from getting dog-eared and, together with the elastic strap and unusually heavy cover boards, confirm that the notebook is ready for travel. The edges of the board sit flush with the page block, ensuring that your Moleskine can never be mistaken for a printed book. In use, it lies obediently open and flat, and the pocket glued into the back cover board invites you to hide souvenirs – photos, tickets stubs, the phone numbers of beautiful strangers. Two hundred pages suggest that you have plenty to write about; the paper itself, tinted to a classy ivory shade and unusually smooth to the touch, implies that your ideas deserve nothing but the best, and the ribbon marker helps you navigate your musings. Discreetly minimal it may seem, but the whole package is as shot through with brand messaging as anything labelled Nike, Mercedes or Apple – and like the best cues, the messaging works on a subconscious level.”

I can attest to the power of a blank page. I have a 300-page ruled spiral notebook that I use for all my notes and thoughts. I complete one book in about two weeks. My notebook is always with me – it’s like a friend who is always around to talk with. I write everything; it helps keep the mind free. This practice has become an integral part of my daily routine and creative process. The act of putting pen to paper allows me to externalise my thoughts, giving them a tangible form outside my mind. It’s not just about recording ideas; it’s about exploring them, connecting disparate concepts, and often stumbling upon unexpected insights. Whether I’m brainstorming business strategies, reflecting on personal experiences, or simply jotting down observations about the world around me, my notebook serves as both a canvas for my thoughts and a time capsule of my intellectual journey. The physical act of writing seems to engage my brain differently than typing on a device (which I am not good at in real-time in meetings). Writing on paper often leads to more nuanced thinking and deeper reflection.

In many ways, my notebook has become an extension of my cognitive processes, a trusted companion in my quest for clarity and creativity. It is my Digital Twin.

Also see: Parts 3-5 from My Life System series.

Thinks 1358

McKinsey: “Preserving the core of the business is paramount for most CEOs, because of a desire to respect the history and business value of established brands. Klaus Kleinfeld, former chair and CEO of Arconic and former president and CEO of Siemens, said, “When a company is over a hundred years old, a lot of people have done a lot of things right. I’m standing on the shoulders of giants. People who have been there before me made the decisions that benefited me.” At the same time, the CEOs we spoke to are aware of the fast-changing context in which they operate—especially in Asia—and the need to continually innovate to future-proof their organizations and maintain their market positions.”

Timothy Taylor: “Many of us now take the widespread availability of ride-sharing for granted. Indeed, many people take the restless innovation and energy of markets for granted in general. Ride-sharing in the real world has its warts and flaws and tradeoffs, as did the previous regime of taxicabs had, as do all real world institutions. But ride-sharing seems to me like an overall dramatic gain in welfare for the million-plus drivers who participate and the many millions of riders. And without the disruptive pressure of market forces, it would not have happened for years, or decades, or perhaps at all.”

FT reviews Nate Silver’s “On the Edge”: “This he divides in two. First, he probes the minds and habits of those who put real money behind their wagers. He breaks in the middle to study the effective habits of these and other, non-gambling risk-takers. The book’s latter half is devoted to bridging some of his theories on risk-taking with how these are used (and misused) in the sphere of investing. Here Silver hints at the debate over skill versus luck and even the morality of investing in AI. Silver has faith in his cohort’s qualities. “Gamblers, traders and model builders see the world as complicated . . . We recognise that it’s hard to beat the market — not impossible, but hard — and we have the battle scars to prove it.”” NYTimes: “The election forecaster argues that the gambler’s mind-set has come to define modern life.”

Bloomberg writes about cyclically adjusted price-earnings ratio, affectionately known as the CAPE ratio. “The CAPE attempts to answer a basic question: When investors buy a stock, they are essentially buying a stake in a company’s earnings, so how much are they paying for those earnings? The CAPE normally applies that question to a broad tracker, such as the S&P 500 Index, by calculating the ratio of the index’s price to a 10-year trailing average of its earnings per share after inflation. So, for example, the S&P 500 closed at 5,319 [on August 8], and its 10-year trailing average earnings are $168 a share after inflation, according to Bloomberg data, which amounts to a CAPE of 32 times. That’s high — nearly double the long-term average since 1881 and the third highest ever, exceeded only at the height of the internet bubble in the late 1990s and earlier this decade.”