In Some Cases – The Acorn Falls Far From The Tree
By Pete Lester, Sr.
March 25, 2008
There are times when my wife just shakes her head and reminds me that her "sons take after" me (guys the formal apology will be sent separately). And truly, there are times when I do see certain mannerisms or tendencies and think: boy, I hope they can shake that better than I do.
On other occasions, they are their own men – which is as it should be; and frankly, I get where they are headed but would not go there… maybe I am just too set in my ways.
Let’s take alarm clocks, wrist watches, land lines and cell phones as examples.
I am a slave to my alarm clock and frankly could not imagine life without one. Also, I think I can count on one arm the number of times in my adult life when I did not wear a watch for a day. Lastly, I could not fathom NOT having a landline in my home.
So where am I headed here…?
The next generation will be very different from mine in several respects, and I am pretty sure I am right when I say: my sons see little need for a watch, an alarm clock or a land line. And I am betting they will go through most of their adult lives without them. Furthermore, I do not think they are alone in these habits.
Sure, they will have some gadget that performs those functions, but it will be the same product that they use as their cell phone. I am not the only one that thinks this is a dramatic shift in demand.
T-Mobile USA announced last month that they will test-market a new product in several markets. The company is rolling out an Internet calling plan that is designed to replace the tried and true “Home Phone.” This development is certainly not un-expected, and it is guaranteed to ratchet up competition in this market-space.
The two markets where T-Mobile will test it happen to be pretty tech savvy markets: Dallas and Seattle.
According to a recent survey by Jupiter Research, 12% of consumers expect to discontinue using their landline service in the next 12 months. [1] This trend echoes data reported in 2004, when Mediamark Research Inc. (MRI) reported over 8% of US households did not have a landline. This was up sharply from 4.2% in 2000. It is important to note that this number does include homes without ANY service, which is shrinking as services across the board are becoming more affordable. [2]
Based upon the data that is emerging, we can conclude that prior to the advent of affordable cell-phones/cell phone plans, when people chose not to have a landline in their home, they did so for financial reasons. Now, people are making a clear choice between two substitute products and consumers are making choices. They are asking: do I want a conventional landline? Do I want a cell phone, or do I want or need both?
It will be interesting to watch this trend as consumer tastes continue to evolve, as technologies improve, and the cost of providing reliable services declines. Still, until I can get consistent, reliable reception, receive a fax over my cell phone, and properly screen calls coming into my home for my daughter, I will stay closer to my father’s tree; and I am guessing, my children and the rest of the next generation of consumers will be significantly different in their consumer preferences.
[1] Gartenberg, Michael; “T-Mobile Introduces Hotspot@Home – First Take,” JupiterResearch, June 27, 2007.
[2] “Landline Free Homes Increasingly Young, Upscale,” Mediamark Research, Inc., October 12, 2004.
QUESTIONS for STUDENTS of ECONOMICS:
- Can you think of other industries where there has been a shift in demand like this (whether driven by technology, changing tastes, availability, affordability, etc.)?
- How does a shift in demand like this impact the allocation of resources?
- Do you think the government should support or subsidize industries where workers are displaced due to dramatic changes in demand?
2 comments:
First I have to laugh out loud after reading your post. It's very funny.
I can totally relate to this change in technology not to a particular industry in the U.S but to a company my mom use to work for in Sierra Leone. Typewriters were replaced for comuputers so every secretary was suppose to either go to a computer school to learn how to use it or find another job. Most people left that company because they couldn't deal with the change. The idea of starting over was too much for some of them to handle.
It's the same for me. I wanted a laptop so bad...well because it's convenient. My problem is, I can't use it without a mouse. There are just certain things I don't know how to do if I don't have my mouse; so I have it hooked up almost permanently and yes I take it everywhere I go.
These shift in demand due to technology change mostly affect older generation. That's actually one of the reasons people get laid off these days. Adjusting to high tech is not as easy for one person as it would be for the other. Some of us just can't let go of certain ways of life because as far as we're concerned, the old way is easy and convenient.
I pesonally think the government should subsidize industries with dramatic change in demand for poeple who were already at the job before the change. Give them the opportunity to learn for a certain period of time before making the decision of letting them go. For most of us, it just takes a while to adjust to new changes. Eventually, we'll get it.
Rugi:
Thank you for your response to the blog. Glad you enjoyed it.
I agree with many of the things you say except the government subsidy part.
I do not believe it is the governments job to equip either you, me or an older person set in their ways for work. I think that motivation must come from us as individuals who aspire to have a better life.
All-in-all though, I do agree with what you say. I do think a lot of us get complacent in our work... and we fail to continue to learn and grow. So, when changes come we have a choice, adapt and grow, or stay as we are and get left behind.
Now, should government encourage us in certain ways to go to school, get re-trained. Sure, but we must understand - the citizens who learn, adapt and grow are paying for those who have decided not to...That was their choice...Again, that word - Choice... That is what economics is all about.
Post a Comment