(For those who say I just don’t get it…get this!)

Over the course of the last few months I have been conveying, as to try to explain, that when I’m expressing my viewpoint on what I might see “over the horizon” I have to remember that where I’m standing may be to my audience, “over the horizon.”

I’ve used this metaphor over the years only to help demonstrate, or to help ensure, that I clarify, or try to portray my positions accurately. Because at the time I’m quite aware it may all sound like “crazy talk” or some other far-flung observation, again, at the time.

However, as I’ve also explained, this is where the position for “first mover advantage” is set. Which is why I use it to begin with. i.e., You need to already be fully engaged when the “horizon” that most are looking out at finally comes into view, for that’s when the bells and Us-too bandwagons begin to appear.

I’ll now offer as example this paradigm expression, in real-time, and in spades.

A few months back I gave an example of what I portended was maybe forthcoming towards smartphones to illustrate this “beyond horizon” idea. At the time assumptions like this were thought to be “crazy talk.” Then, the crazy idea that the iPhone® may not be as good for society as everyone thought, whether one agrees with the premise or assumptions are irrelevant. It’s the fact they are now making headlines across the mainstream media, not just the business/financial, is where the relevancy now stands.

And today we have another…

Back in mid December I wrote an article titled, “Is Facebook’s ‘Messenger Kids’ Social Media’s ‘Joe Camel’ Moment?”

In that article I posited the following. To wit:

“This was that defining moment when everything seemed to change when it came to smoking. I know, because I was an avid smoker myself at that time. The moment this product and habit was seen for what it was (e.g., a true physical and psychological dependent habit) where a link, whether intentional or perceived, could be argued that the intent was to link a brand or logo to children as to perpetuate or indoctrinate the idea that smoking was cool or hip – everything changed. And I mean just that – everything.”

At the time the above comparison, along with the very notion, that it could be forthcoming and possibly soon, was met (as usual) with cat-calls and derision by many a tech aficionado, or next-in-rotation fund manager. That was, until it just hit the clearly viewed horizon of the mainstream business/financial media. Again, to wit:


For those who may not be familiar with the names, they are two of the main reporters or personalities of CNBC™, and the person calling for the regulation is none other than the CEO of Salesforce™ Marc Benioff. Not exactly someone who is tech-phobic, or anti-tech to say the least.

As a matter of fact, when CEO’s of tech are suddenly and publicly (hence lies a very important key) calling for draconian regulation within its own industry? (And what the regulations did and were to the tobacco industry stand as testament to the idea of draconian, whether one agrees with them or not.) You now have the equivalent of a super-storm, in full view, now rolling out from over the horizon for everyone to see.

And just like most storms that are over water, they’ll pick up with more intensity before they hit land fueled with increasing hot air as to strengthen it. And that hot air is as sure to come as night turns to day. Why?

That hot air will be coming from nothing less than the hallowed bellows of politicians with their calls of fines, fees, and regulations. In other words…

Mark Zuckerberg’s goal of selling 20% of his shares might be a bar set too low.

Or too late.

© 2018 Mark St.Cyr

Footnote: These “FTWSIJDGIGT” articles came into being when many of the topics I had opined on over the years were being openly criticized for “having no clue”. Yet, over the years these insights came back around showing maybe I knew a little bit more than some were giving me credit for. It was my way of tongue-in-cheek as to not use the old “I told you so” analogy. I’m saying this purely for the benefit of those who may be new or reading here for the first time (and there are a great many of you and thank you too all). I never wanted or want to seem like I’m doing the “Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah” type of response to my detractors. I’d rather let the chips fall – good or bad – and let readers decide the credibility of either side. Occasionally however, there are, and have been times they do need to be pointed out which is why these now have taken on a life of their own. (i.e., something of significance per se that may have a direct impact on one’s business etc., etc.) And readers, colleagues, and others have requested their continuance.