Sublime

In data and analytics, Bloomberg is being challenged by a raft of start-ups. Some of them target smaller investors like me who baulk at paying Bloomberg’s US$24,000 subscription fee. Others target bigger customers who want to go deeper into more specialised data than Bloomberg supports. I use two alternatives—Koyfin and Sentieo.

Bloomberg fits the Christensen incumbent model not just because it exceeds the needs of some customers but also because it ignores the needs of others.

Fourteen years ago, David Tepper went on Squawk Box and shared how he made $7bn in a single year and laid out his worldview and a strategy that worked for the coming decade. Last week, almost fourteen years to the day, David returned to Squawk Box to discuss China, stimulus, AI, and more. He starts by discussing whether... See more

But Bloomberg’s a tough device to dislodge. It retains prime real estate on its users’ desks and it’s a social network and it’s a luxury good. In combination, these features have lent it immunity to Christensen’s disruption theory. Slack may be an easier challenge.

Yet in the US$32 billion industry for financial data, Bloomberg is the dominant player, with a third of the market. Its position has become even more entrenched over the past ten years, as those around it have lost market share.

Michael Bloomberg started his company in 1981. He was already 39 years old. He faced large incumbents with tens of thousands of installed terminals and by global news agencies. Let's take a look at how he cracked the code to become the dominant player in financial information https://t.co/y0MeYR82s6