Ring doorbell inventor on shark tank

Principle Of Management

"The Exclusive Inside Story Of Ring: From 'Shark Tank' Reject To Amazon's

Latest Acquisition"

Forbes

February 27, 2018

Article Link:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2018/02/27/amazon-is-buying-ring-the-

pioneer-of-the-video-doorbell-for-1-billion/#753eb644706c

Company Profile:

• Ring, a home security device company soon to be purchased buy Amazon

• Video doorbells, Security Cameras, Security Systems

• Approximately 2000 employees

• Jamie Siminoff, Inventor and CEO

• Located in Santa Monica, California

• Revenue amount unknown

Article Topic/Issue:

Ring, a newly invented doorbell company, appeared on Shark Tank in 2015. After

listening to Jamie Siminoff’s, the inventor and CEO, pitch the sharks turned him away

and left him feeling horrible. However, he says appearing on the TV show Shark Tank

helped keep his business alive and he is now going from “Shark Tank reject” to a soon to

be product under Amazon.

Book Topic:

“A competitive advantage becomes a sustainable advantage when other companies

cannot duplicate the value a firm is providing to customers. Management, 10th Edition,

2017, page 113.

Article Summary & Analysis:

Inventor James Smirnoff got the idea for a video doorbell when his wife kept

complaining he could not hear the doorbell. In 2013, he had lunch with an entrepreneur

who urged him to try out for shark tank and provided him with the television show’s

contact information.

Four months later, he gave the pitch with the then name “Doorbot.” The Sharks turned

down the deal and he was devastated, but the episode provided great publicity for his

company. Siminoff says, “We were a little crappy company in the garage. Being on

Shark Tank let us survive.”

Ring allows users to see a video broadcast through a camera in the doorbell by using an

app on their phone. However, this year there have been several “copycat doorbells”

hitting the market. For example, security companies like ADT, Google and even

Amazon.

An analyst who tracks 30 home security companies at Imperial Capital, Saliq Khan, says

that Google-owned Nest poses a threat. Nest has expanded beyond its thermostat with

Wi-Fi connection capabilities and created its own home security devices.

Ring has expanded beyond doorbells to adding an array of motion-activated night-vision

cameras equipped with video, speakers, LED lights and sirens.

Although there is much competition lurking in the video doorbell market, Amazon is

choosing to purchase Ring for $1.1 billion. Amazon is expected to integrate some

elements of Ring with other Amazon-owned products like Alexa.

I think the doorbell with video enhanced technology is a fantastic idea. This invention

took some serious, time, sweat and determination. I think it will positively aide various

aspects of the everyday American life. In addition, this idea is becoming so popular and

that many companies are starting to formulate their own version of the doorbell home

security systems. I find it very interesting that the sharks turned down this jaw-dropping

idea. Amazon is hopefully going to help Ring bring their revenue, ratings and reviews to

a whole new and popular level. When the contract finally closes between Ring and

Amazon, the two are going to have to work together to formulate a sustainable

competitive advantage if they want to become “unbeatable” by other companies like

Google-owned Nest, and ADT. They also must be able to distinguish that a sustainable

competitive advantage is not a simply just a long-lasting competitive advantage. “Instead,

a competitive advantage is

sustained

if competitors have tried unsuccessfully to duplicate

the advantage and have, for the moment, stopped trying to duplicate it... The resources

must be valuable, rare, imperfectly imitable

and

nonsubstitutable.” Management, 10th

Edition, 2017, page 113.

Article Summary #1

“Uber blasted by investors for toxic culture”

USA TODAY

February 23, 2017

Article Link:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2017/02/23/uber-blasted-for-toxic-

culture-by-two-investors/98318186/

Company Profile:

Uber Technologies Inc., is a privately owned multinational transportation network

company

Uber develops, markets and operates the Uber software application which

connects customers with drivers for transportation and package/food delivery

Approximately 6700 employees

Travis Kalanick, Founder and CEO

Thuan Pham, CTO

Ryan Graves, COO

Headquarters located in San Francisco, CA with operations in 528 cities

worldwide

Revenue (2016) 5.5 Billion

Topic/Issue:

Investors pen open letter chastising Uber for hiring insiders to investigate sexual

harassment claims by a former company engineer, Susan Fowler, after a blog she wrote

about her experience working for the company went viral.

Book Topic:

“Social responsiveness refers to a company’s strategy to respond to stakeholders’

economic, legal, ethical or discretionary expectations concerning social responsibility.”

Principles of Management 9

th

Edition, 2017, 2016 page 84.

Summary and Analysis:

Uber CEO Travis Kalanick opened an internal investigation into claims of sexual

harassment by former engineer Susan Fowler. Ms. Fowler alleges that she was sexually

harassed by her direct supervisor and that when she reported the issue Uber’s human

resources department did nothing.

In an open letter investors Mitch Kapor and Freada Kapor Klein have chastised the

company for hiring company “insiders” to investigate the claims. Leading the

investigation are Liane Hornsey, chief of human resources and former attorney general

Eric Holder who has been working for Uber in their battle against fingerprint background

checks for drivers. They believe this move is another example of the unwillingness of

Uber to be open, transparent and direct regarding their “toxic” business culture and will

enable them to sweep the matter under the rug and continue business as usual. Lawyers

for Uber have countered saying that their investigation will be “thorough impartial and

objective.”

“A social responsiveness issue exists when company actions do not meet stakeholder

expectations.” Principles of Management 9

th

edition page 84. I believe that Uber has

chosen the wrong course of action in their social responsiveness to this issue for several

reasons. First, there is a direct conflict of interest in choosing employees to investigate

other employees at the same firm especially when the company’s reputation is at stake.

The investigating employees who owe their livelihood to the company will be

predisposed to skew findings in the company’s best interest. Secondly, investors and

customers are already jaded by Uber’s history of bad business practices and half-hearted

responses. The Kapors cite in their open letter that when called out by the media Uber

holds all hands meetings, apologizes, vows to change and then continues doing business

the same way they always have. Lastly, customers, who in the age of internet have

access to more information, are more concerned with the way companies do business,

and want to do business with companies that share their values. The systematic denial of

Susan Fowlers claims of harassment are especially poignant considering the political

environment and heightened state of the women’s movement.