Bloomberg’s “Terminal”
It starts with LinkedIn and someone boasting about AI and its replacement of something big, bold, popular — in this case the Bloomberg terminal. A few weeks ago, it was about myriad ways to do market analysis. It’s about major disruption.
Or it starts with a government official or DOGE taking on the incumbents — also big, bold, popular and the 800 gorillas of their space. Just look at RFK taking on the major scholarly journals.
Then you have to unpeel fact from fiction. In the case of the Bloomberg terminal, this from our VP & Lead Analyst.
…. The author of the post has taken a retail investor use case and applied it to Bloomberg, ignoring that retail investors don’t use Bloomberg. Bloomberg has strengths which go beyond basic equities data (data which doesn’t make it to the public sphere and other network and connectivity,) so it looks like we’ll have to wait for Perplexity or OpenAI or any of the others to be a real challenge. I’ll revise my opinion as I see more advancements. For the last decade, there have been a spare of PR almost once a year, touting potential Bloomberg killers. Their track record of success has been zero. So, I take the LinkedIn post with a pinch of salt but continue to keep an eye out for what’s happening.
In the case of RFK, we have to look at whether there are suitable replacements. Has the government created alternatives to the big names? The world’s science is also coming in big ways out of China. What happens to the science from other advanced economies? Just as AI regulation is becoming ever more balkanized, we are seeing aspirations for the same under the leadership of our U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services.
Our dialog about the LinkedIn post continued:
Referencing Innovator’s Dilemma by Clayton Christensen, one colleague noted:
“…. Good enough for the disrupter starts with low-value use cases, and as technology improves iteratively, the disrupter moves up to medium-value use cases. The incumbent cedes ground on these lower value use cases as they are not as profitable, but eventually the disrupter can target the higher value use cases for much lower cost. We have seen this before, and it rarely ever ends well for the incumbents.”
A response:
“…Yes and one of the things we keep hearing about and seeing in our research is defensive posture on AI and for vendors to know what can come out of left field that is ‘good enough’ — it will take a lot to take on the cache of the terminal and I’m sure it’s not a direct replacement but developments like this can’t be ignored as they are indicative of where the world is going and the sentiment going on out there….
Still another added:
…. this is certainly fascinating — and the ambition about change is as interesting as the outcomes. Nobody is going to knock over Bloomberg in a moment, because the “trust transfer” takes far longer than the technology innovation. But the fact that people look at trusted brands and see a target: That is fascinating and indicative of how forceful these changes will be and how quickly they will take root.
Sachin is the expert, but I imagine that the real impact of the changes brought by AI technology will be fulfilled when It enables retail investors to behave in a way that they find more advantageous, but which the current environment does not permit. In other words, breakthroughs which succeed not just by imitating what we were doing before, but by doing it better and more conveniently….”
Clearly the terminal isn’t terminal — yet.
One can’t help but reflect on technology stalwarts that no longer exist today. It is hard to knock out the incumbents — but what about Kodak and DEC or Compaq who no longer exist as standalone brands. There are dozens if not more like them. Look at the tatters Intel is in — reeling from moving too slow. Andy Grove said only the paranoid survive; his beloved Intel is on its knees right now facing existential threat.
For years there have been forecasts about the demise of higher education. It is finally facing disruption given high tuition turning out graduates facing a dearth of jobs. Funding cuts, politicization of the campus, and the re-emergence of trade schools add to the turmoil.
We will see the number of professionals shrinking as their roles give way to AI. So not only are incumbents targets but aspects of the professional workforces they serve will be going to the machines too.
This is how it starts. When you read about Bloomberg, the major scholarly journals (by name), how to use the machines to do better analysis, it represents the zeitgeist of the moment. What’s in the headlines, especially by brand name, is a harbinger of things to come. It is not going to end well because distrust and/or resentment of the 800lb gorilla continues to grow while the sentiment to democratize access and technology’s momentum accelerates.
It’s never great to be on a pedestal whether Intel, Bloomberg, esteemed journals, or an entire industry like higher-education, or film, or music before them. People have this funny relationship with trusted brands and pedestals. Being named in stories like these is never good.