Skip to content

About us

eCounsel group

A boutique firm with unparalleled expertise in business and technology. We have good command of industrial ecology and legal practice, and have undertaken highly regarded cases. Because the small business scope, we pay more emphasis on effectiveness and efficiency, and choose clients with deliberation. The managing partner not only has extensive experiences in various legal issues more over than 20 years, but invests and manages several technology companies. In addition, he always checks each case rigorously. Clients’ business objectives are our primary focus. To achieve the same in the most cost-effective fashion trumps all seemingly sophisticated legal discussions.

Can Apple Beat Spotify's First-Mover Advantage

2015 - 06 - 02

Apple, Feeling Heat From Spotify, to Offer Streaming Music Service

「With its dominant position in music threatened by a decline in download sales, Apple Inc.is preparing to launch a direct rival to Spotify AB and other popular services that let users stream songs instead of buy them.

The tech giant is betting that for the second time in as many decades it can persuade millions of people around the world to change how they listen to and pay for music. In 2003, the company’s iTunes Music Store made downloading individual songs the most common way for people to buy music—and made iTunes the biggest music retailer on the planet…….」

http://www.wsj.com/articles/apple-to-announce-new-music-services-1433183201?mod=LS1

「去年在iTunes上買音樂的人有一億一千萬,而每位客戶的平均年度消費金額略比$30多一點」
“Of the 110 million people who bought music on the iTunes Store last year, the average customer spent a little more than $30 over a 12-month period.”

看這個數據我們想想,Spotify現在有四千五百萬免費用戶、一千五百萬付費訂戶;而因為Apple看來和唱片公司已經打定主意要殺掉freemium模式了,那麼它究竟能創造多少$10/月的訂戶呢?

另外,關於音樂,我直覺上不看好Google;那是一家技術與商業模式很牛B的公司,但它並不以文化底蘊為立國基礎。

除了iTunes, KKBOX, 以及我們只專注在全球小眾的MUZIK Online,在音樂串流上我看不出來有誰真正賺得到錢。

Spotify這種每年虧上億美金、只是靠拱局滾資本財撐大泡沫的,和Amazon的級數還相差太遠。

Recommended article 

Trucks v.s Drones

Let’s see if this article from Insider makes any sense? 我們來看看Insider這篇文章到底合不合理? 無人機送貨純為噱頭?成本為快遞一萬倍 送貨成本計算:(能源成本 + 操作人員成本 + 載具費用攤提) 這個基本公式,不論用卡車或是無人機,都一體適用。從Amazon日漸廣佈的fulfillment center送貨到客戶那兒,Prime二天、Prime Now二小時、再進到將來Prime Air以半小時為目標;其同時、同路線的出貨數量都趨於靈活之小量,大型貨車根本使不上力。用無人機,會比起用卡車的單趟人力貴,我都高度懷疑了,還一萬倍? 送貨的能源成本:卡車 vs. 無人機 每英哩,卡車是 $0.5 而無人機只要 $0.02。所以,混用卡車和無人機來完成送貨到府,就能大幅降低亞馬遜必須支出的運費 the fuel cost of running a diesel-powered truck…

Pension Reform Basics: Exceptions for Legitimate Expectation

Recently, there has been scrutiny over the pension system of military officials, civil servants and educators in Taiwan. Our tax payments indeed have been allocated largely to keep the promises which our governments made to support…

Is Managing Documents Digitally Too Costly?

Digital Documents Management System doesn’t create extra financial expenses because 電子化文件管理系統不會造成企業額外的財務負擔,原因在於科技的日新月異致使各種儲存設備之價格大幅下降。Continue reading