came out yesterday, the business world of Li Yifeng and has been completely destroyed - there will be no chance in 100 years. The brokerage company behind him and the seven companies he is associated with will all fall into the abyss.
Of course, there are more than a dozen "other companies" that have signed Li Yifeng, including but not limited to real fruit , Prada, duck down jacket and so on. From the point of view of monetary losses, the amount of the loss will be as much as the signing fee has been spent. According to data from Xingchen Media, Li Yifeng's endorsement fee is 15 million yuan per year, which is about 7.5 million yuan per year. What inspiration does
give entrepreneurs?
From a business perspective, Li Yifeng is also an entrepreneur, and his core model is to "rely on IP" to make money. To tell the truth, from the perspective of "making a lot of money", I personally think that the "IP model" is a very poor model.
I have a sentence for all entrepreneurs: If you want to become bigger and stronger, or have a dream of going public, you must not let the "boss's personal IP" be greater than the "company IP". Otherwise you must not be listed - that's what I said.
I will only give two examples: Luo Zhenyu's "get", Wu Xiaobo 's " Ba Jiuling ".
From a commercial standpoint, they've done a great job. For example, last year's revenue was 843 million, and the net profit was 125 million - the financial figures were completely up to standard, but why did it fail to hit the IPO seven times in a row? One of the core reasons is that the China Securities Regulatory Commission believes that the company is too dependent on the personal IP of "Luo Zhenyu".
In 2019, Wu Xiaobo also wanted to sell "Ba Jiuling" to the listed company Quantong Education, seeking a curve listing, but it also failed in the end. According to Wu Xiaobo's self-revelation, one of the core reasons is that the China Securities Regulatory Commission believes that "Wu Xiaobo's personal IP is too strong."
Therefore, any entrepreneur who relies on the "IP model" will definitely not be able to go public in the future. Some people may want to ask, does the company have to go public, or will it die? It won't die, but it certainly won't make it to the top trending ranks.
not listed means "unable to raise capital": VCs certainly don't see it. Because the ultimate dream of their investment is that the company goes public and the shares are cashed out. According to the statistics of pencil DATA, most of the listed companies in the past three years can complete 2 billion-5 billion financing before listing. If you can't go public in the future, you won't be able to get the 2 billion to 5 billion financing. And if your opponent gets this money through model innovation, it means that the opponent is 2 billion to 5 billion richer than you, how can you do it with your opponent?
No matter how talented you are, as long as you do something that "cannot go public", you will not be able to get financing, go public, or rush to the top of domestic companies, such as China's top 500 companies. For example, Luo Yonghao , who started hammer mobile phone in 2012, raised 1.7 billion yuan; but once he became a sales anchor, almost no mainstream institutions voted for him, including his previous old shareholders.
I personally think that there are two extremes in business models:
One is the "listing model", which is the ceiling of "bigger and stronger", which can maximize the scale of revenue/profit. Under this model, the bigger the company, the more money it makes.
The other is the "IP model", which is the ceiling of "being small and weak", which can maximize the gross profit rate/net profit rate, even infinitely close to 100%. In this model, the smaller the company, the more money it makes.
For example, a consulting company I know, the most profitable state is "1 boss + 2 assistants". In the past 3 years, the boss wants to expand the company and expand the team to dozens or hundreds of people, but it loses tens of millions every year. .
This is the difference: both are organizations, but the former really relies on the company to make money, while the latter relies on "individuals" to make money - in other words, the boss hasAbility, the company is only responsible for realizing the ability of the boss.
Of course, the "IP model" has irreplaceable advantages, such as making money when starting a business - low risk. For individuals, the rewards are also good. But the company must not get bigger. Once it gets bigger, the risks begin to be out of proportion to the benefits.
Its biggest risk is "too centralization" and too much dependence on the boss. Once the boss "has an accident", it means that the company has an accident. It's like stepping on a nail with bare feet. If you step on 100 nails with both feet at the same time, you will be safe and sound; but if you step on 2 nails with both feet, the heavier you are, the more broken you will be. The IP model is the latter. The bigger the company is, the more serious the loss will be.
But companies that rely on organizations to make money are safe: the boss's accident basically does not affect the company. For example, in 2018, Liu Qiangdong suffered a personal reputation crisis, which hardly affected Jingdong ; another example was in 2020, Ruixing had a financial fraud incident, and a few bosses such as Lu Zhengyao were scolded, but they still did not Affect Luckin's business development. Such cases abound.
Let me say one last thing: people always die, even if you make the IP model to the extreme, your company will not survive for 100 years. Therefore, if you, like , Jack Ma, and , also want to be a company that lasts for 102 years, please put "personal IP" after "company brand".
I bet your company is more likely to last 102 years if you do this. If I lose the bet, leave a message in the comment area, and I will pay you a dollar after 102 years.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-