Wednesday, May 3, 2017

The Clear Connection Between Slavery and American Capitalism - HBS Working Knowledge - Harvard Business School

Anybody know any online, podcasts, book club or other intellectual discussions, of this book or the subject? Anybody interested?





Why Are We Still Classifying Companies by Industry?


What Airbnb, Uber, and Alibaba Have in Common

Barry LibertYoram (Jerry) WindMegan Beck

NOVEMBER 20, 2014


When Facebook acquired the messaging service WhatsApp for $19 billion in the spring of 2014, the question on everyone's mind was, does the service really merit a valuation of almost 20 times projected revenues?

WhatApp's valuation may be extreme, but huge gaps between revenues and valuation are increasingly common. Cloud-based sharing service Dropbox received venture capital funding at a valuation of $10 billion, or 40 times revenues. raised funding at a valuation of $10 billion, which would make it worth nearly 20 times its revenues — and worth more than Hyatt Hotels or Wyndham Worldwide. Taxi-replacement service Uber is currently raising funding and is expected to see a valuation of $30 billion, estimated to be more than 15 times revenues. Most recently, Alibaba's IPO raised funds at a value approximately 10 times revenues.

These companies represent a new trend in the types of business that investors prefer. Leaders of more traditional companies are left wondering why these upstarts merit such high valuations. Are they more profitable? Do they see faster growth? Do they have higher return on assets and lower marginal costs?

Our answer is yes — to all of the above.

In collaboration with Deloitte, we examined 40 years of financial data for the S&P 500 companies to see how valuations trends have evolved along with business models and emerging technologies. Our research led to three key findings.

1. There are four business models.

To begin, we searched for a simple way to characterize the different types of business that were engaging the hearts and minds, and pocket books, of investors. Because today's highly valued, fast growing businesses can be found in almost every industry, we quickly moved past standard industrial classifications and developed a new framework based on business model, which is theprincipal way an organization invests its capital to generate and capture value.

The four models are:

Asset Builders: These companies build, develop, and lease physical assets to make, market, distribute, and sell physical things. Examples include Ford, Wal-Mart, and FedEx.Service Providers: These companies hire employees who provide services to customers or produce billable hours for which they charge. Examples include United Healthcare, Accenture, and JP Morgan.Technology Creators: These companies develop and sell intellectual property such as software, analytics, pharmaceuticals, and biotechnology. Examples include Microsoft, Oracle, and Amgen.Network Orchestrators. These companies create a network of peers in which the participants interact and share in the value creation. They may sell products or services, build relationships, share advice, give reviews, collaborate, co-create and more. Examples include eBay, Red Hat, and Visa, Uber, Tripadvisor, and Alibaba.

We applied this business model framework to our dataset, the S&P 500 Index companies from 1972 to present, in order to see how the four models performed over time. Two different researchers categorized each company into its dominant business model, giving consideration to several factors: The company's description of itself in annual reports; the revenue generated by different business units; capital allocation patterns such as R&D or COGS expenditure; and market perceptions including news articles and analyst reports.

Although most companies operate in several business model categories, we assigned to each company the most advanced business model that it uses for a significant portion of its business, or that it is making strong efforts to develop. For example, although most of Nike's business is manufacturing and selling shoes, which we classify as Asset Building, Nike has also developed the Nike+ ecosystem, which connects these physical goods to the Internet where users track activities and share progress with their friends. For this reason, we classified Nike as a Network Orchestrator.

2. Network Orchestrators create more value.

Our business model classification and analysis yielded some surprising results. Network Orchestrators outperform companies with other business models on several key dimensions. These advantages include higher valuations relative to their revenue, faster growth, and larger profit margins.

Let's look at the numbers in detail. Our analysis indicates that as of 2013, Network Orchestrators receive valuations two to four times higher, on average, than companies with the other business models. Further, trend data over the past decade indicates that this valuation gap is widening over time. We call this degree to which a business model drives the gap between revenues and valuation "the multiplier effect."

A company's price to revenue ratio – what we call its "multiplier" — is calculated based on its market valuation and revenues, two numbers that are difficult to manipulate with accounting. Market valuations reflect investor expectations for future cash flows, and indeed we found that companies with the highest multipliers outperform less valued companies on revenue growth, profitability, and Return on Assets for more than a decade.

When we looked beyond the impact of business model on price-to-revenue ratio, we also found that Network Orchestrators outperform companies with other business models on both compound annual growth rate and profit margin. We believe this occurs because the value creation performed by the network on behalf of the organization reduces the company's marginal cost, as described in Jeremy Rifkin's The Zero Marginal Cost Society. For example, benefits from its customer's reviews and AirBnb leverages its network's housing assets.

3. Few companies operate as Network Orchestrators.

Fewer than 5% of companies are Network Orchestrators despite the positive impact of this business model on multiple performance measures. Why? We see several reasons.

First, today's network-based business models require new technologies and competencies. Most corporate leaders are skilled at building, owning, and managing their own physical assets or people. Network Orchestrators, however, rely on intangibles such as knowledge (Gerson Lehrman Group) or relationships (Facebook), or other people's assets (Uber) as well as new "non-management" and "non-ownership" competencies related to facilitating a network of individuals and their individual assets and relationships.

Second, Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) categorize some assets as "assets" (plant property and equipment), others as expenses (people, training, and intellectual property) and ignores others (customers, sentiment, and networks) altogether, frequently resulting in the under-allocation of capital to intangible assets. This is especially problematic given that, today, intangible assets make up approximately 80% of corporate market value.

Third, standard industry designations result in siloed thinking, leaving empty space where new business models can enter. For example, think back to the early 1990s. Most traditional retailers were slow to move into the online space because they didn't consider themselves "technology companies." The online market was left open, and in came a slew of new players such as Amazon, eBay, and Zappos, who gobbled up market share and changed the retail game. Today, the power of networks is creating a new cross-industry transformation. Consider what Uber and Lyft are doing to the taxi industry or how Airbnb is affecting the hotel industry.

Finally, business models are tightly integrated into all parts of a company, and are therefore daunting to change. Changing business model requires changing capital allocation, but Research by McKinsey & Company shows that most companies follow the same allocation patterns year after year, despite dramatic changes in the business environment.

These factors make it difficult for executives and board members to cash in on the value offered by new business models.

Networks are sources of information, capabilities, and assets that lie in and around every organization. Most networks, however, lie dormant and untapped. To become a Network Orchestrator and create more value and better performance, leaders must connect to and activate their networks, tapping into new sources of value, both tangible (Airbnb's network of lodgings) and intangible (the expertise of Apple's Developer Network). We recommend that all leaders and boards consider the steps below:

Assess your business model. Understand which business models currently exist within your organization and also the preferences and biases of the leadership team members who have created these models through capital allocation.Inventory your network assets. Take stock of your dormant network assets including customers, employees, partners, suppliers, distributors, and investors, and determine which have the greatest potential.Reallocate your capital to networks. Divert at least 5% to 10% of investment capital to activating your networks. Take an experimental approach to early allocation and expect ongoing adaptation. This could be accomplished organically, or through acquisition or partnership.Add network KPIs. Add to your standard financial metrics new network-oriented indicators such as number of participants, their sentiment, and level of engagement. These KPIs will provide direction for your network adaptation.

The bottom line: begin your evolution today and create the multiplier effect in your own organization. Activate your dormant networks by reaching out to your customers, employees, partners, suppliers, employees, and investors and figure out how you can co-create value with them.

Take this assessement on to determine your business model and learn how to build and leverage your network assets.

Barry Libert is the CEO of OpenMatters, a digital consultancy and angel investor, and Senior Fellow at the SEI Center at Wharton. He is also the coauthor of The Network Imperative: How to Survive and Grow in the Age of Digital Business Models.

Yoram (Jerry) Wind is the Lauder Professor and a professor of marketing at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School in Philadelphia. He is the coauthor of The Network Imperative: How to Survive and Grow in the Age of Digital Business Models.

Megan Beck is a digital consultant at OpenMatters and researcher at the SEI Center at Wharton. She is the coauthor of The Network Imperative: How to Survive and Grow in the Age of Digital Business Models.

This article is about STRATEGY


Related Topics:



Related Articles


Pipelines, Platforms, and the New Rules of Strategy

Geoffrey G. Parker; Marshall W. Van Alstyne; Sangeet Paul Choudary


Network Effects Aren't Enough

Andrei Hagiu; Simon Rothman


Why Uber and Airbnb Needed a Different Kind of CEO

Daniel McGinn




Sun Sun 7 months ago

Dear Barry, I am very interesting in your research. Can you give me the Data in this article? Thank you very much.


0  0 



We hope the conversations that take place on will be energetic, constructive, and thought-provoking. To comment, readers must sign in or register. And to ensure the quality of the discussion, our moderating team will review all comments and may edit them for clarity, length, and relevance. Comments that are overly promotional, mean-spirited, or off-topic may be deleted per the moderators' judgment. All postings become the property of Harvard Business Publishing.

Partner Center

Subscribe + Save!


The LatestMost PopularAll TopicsMagazine ArchiveVideoAudioWebinarsSubscriber ExclusivesMy LibraryNewsletters


Article ReprintsBooksCasesCollectionsMagazine IssuesHBR Guide SeriesHBR 20-Minute ManagersHBR Must ReadsTools


Contact UsAdvertise with UsSubscribeInformation for Booksellers/RetailersMastheadGlobal EditionsMedia InquiriesGuidelines for AuthorsHBR Analytic Services


(Asia Pacific: +612.8296.5401)


customerservice@harvardbusiness.orgCustomer Service Help & FAQsCopyright Permissions


FacebookTwitterLinkedInGoogle+Your Newsreader

About Us 

Careers Privacy Policy Copyright Information Trademark Policy 

Harvard Business Publishing:

 Higher Education Corporate Learning Harvard Business Review

Copyright © 2017 Harvard Business School Publishing. All rights reserved. Harvard Business Publishing is an affiliate of Harvard Business School.

Saturday, April 29, 2017

The Man Who Saved Europe the Last Time - WSJ


20940.51 -0.19%
U.S. 10 Yr

0/32 Yield 2.281%

1.0897 0.21%
The Wall Street Journal
Reveal Navigation Options
Subscribe Sign In
Trump Has Been Lucky in His Enemies
Trump Has Been Lucky in His Enemies
Trump's Finest Moment (So Far)
Trump's Finest Moment (So Far)
Mark Meadows's First 100 Days
Mark Meadows's First 100 Days
Revolutionary Techniques, Incendiary Image
Revolutionary Techniques, Incendiary Image
How to Live Like Thoreau
How to Live Like Thoreau
Trump's Next 200 Days
Trump's Next 200 Days
A GDP Warning for the GOP
A GDP Warning for the GOP
MetLife's Systemically Important Case
MetLife's Systemically Important Case
The Man Who Saved Europe the Last Time
The Man Who Saved Europe the Last Time
America's Most Anti-Reform Institution? The Media
America's Most Anti-Reform Institution ...
Does the Public Need Protection From Rogue Auctioneers?
Does the Public Need Protection From ...
Let's Take Exception to the Term 'American Exceptionalism'
Let's Take Exception to the Term 'American Exceptionalism'
Trump Has Been Lucky in His Enemies
Trump Has Been Lucky in His Enemies
Trump's Finest Moment (So Far)
Trump's Finest Moment (So Far)
Mark Meadows's First 100 Days
Mark Meadows's First 100 Days
Revolutionary Techniques, Incendiary Image
Revolutionary Techniques, Incendiary Image
How to Live Like Thoreau
How to Live Like Thoreau
Trump's Next 200 Days
Trump's Next 200 Days
A GDP Warning for the GOP
A GDP Warning for the GOP
MetLife's Systemically Important Case
MetLife's Systemically Important Case
The Man Who Saved Europe the Last Time
The Man Who Saved Europe the Last Time
America's Most Anti-Reform Institution? The Media
America's Most Anti-Reform Institution ...
The Man Who Saved Europe the Last Time
Konrad Adenauer restored democracy to Germany and helped unify a devastated Continent.
Konrad Adenauer (second from left), Sept. 21, 1949, with the high commissioners of the occupation (left to right), America's John J. McCloy, Britain's Sir Brian Robertson and France's André François-Poncet.
Konrad Adenauer (second from left), Sept. 21, 1949, with the high commissioners of the occupation (left to right), America's John J. McCloy, Britain's Sir Brian Robertson and France's André François-Poncet. PHOTO: BETTMANN ARCHIVE
By Henry A. Kissinger
April 28, 2017 6:10 p.m. ET
The attribute of greatness is reserved for leaders from whose time onward history can be told only in terms of their achievements. I observed essential elements of Germany's history—as a native son, as a refugee from its upheavals, as a soldier in the American army of occupation, and as a witness to its astonishing renewal.

Only a few who experienced this evolution remain. For many contemporary Germans, the Adenauer period seems like a tale from an era long transcended. To the contrary, they live in a dynamic established by Konrad Adenauer, a man whose lifespan, from 1876 to 1967, covered all but five years of the unified German national state first proclaimed in 1871.

Devastated, impoverished, partitioned, the Federal Republic came about after World War II by the merger of the American, British and French zones of occupation, containing just two-thirds of Germany's prewar population. Five million refugees from Germany's prewar territories needed integration; they agitated for the recovery of lost territories. The Soviet occupation zone, containing 18 million people, was turned into a communist political entity.

The Federal Republic's advent capped a century of discontinuity. The Empire after Bismarck had felt beleaguered by the alliances surrounding it; the Weimar Republic after World War I had felt abused by an imposed peace settlement; Hitler had sought an atavistic world dominion; the Federal Republic arose amid a legacy of global resentment.

The newly elected German Parliament chose Adenauer as chancellor by a margin of just one vote on Sept. 15, 1949. Shortly afterward, on Nov. 22, 1949, he signed the Petersberg Agreement with the three Allied high commissioners, conferring the attributes of sovereignty on the Federal Republic but withholding its premise of juridical equality. The center of its mining activity, the Ruhr, remained under special Allied control, as did the industrial Saar region along the French border. Adenauer's acquiescence to these terms earned him the sobriquet from his opposition "Chancellor of the Allies."

In his first formal encounter with the three high commissioners, on Sept. 21, 1949, Adenauer demonstrated that he would accept discrimination but not subordination. The high commissioners had assembled on a carpet; to its side, a place for Adenauer had been designated. The chancellor challenged protocol by stepping directly onto the carpet facing his hosts.

From this posture, Adenauer heralded a historic turning point. The new Federal Republic would seek, in his words, "full freedom" by earning a place in the community of nations, not by pressure or by seizing it. Calling for an entirely new conception of foreign policy, Adenauer proclaimed the goal of "a positive and viable European federation" to overcome "the narrow nationalistic conception of the states as it prevailed in the 19th and 20th century . . . in order to restore the unity of European life in all fields of endeavor."

Adenauer's conduct reinforced his rejection of European history. Tall, erect, imperturbable, his face immobile from an automobile accident in his youth, he exuded the serenity of the pre-World War I world that had formed him. Equally distinctive was his sparse speaking style. It conveyed that unobtrusiveness and performance, not exhortation or imposition, were to be the operating style for the new Germany.

Winston Churchill had made a comparable proposal for Europe two days before in Zurich, but Churchill was not in office then. Governing amid defeat and division, Adenauer had proposed an indefinite (possibly permanent) partition of his country while integrating it into a nascent European structure. The country whose nationalism had precipitated two world wars would henceforth rely on partnership with its erstwhile enemies.

The turn westward proved fundamental. The choice of Bonn as the new capital, located in the westernmost part of Germany, with close links to Western Europe, was symbolic. Adenauer convinced the Parliament to select Bonn because, as he said sardonically, he wanted the capital to be in the wine region, not amid potato fields, and not least because his home village of Rhöndorf (population of about 1,000) was not suitable for a capital.

It required all of Adenauer's personality and stature to implement these visions. Opposition came largely from the Social Democratic Party, which, while pro-democracy, insisted on a national policy of neutrality. The opposition included vestiges of German conservatives, one of whose spokesmen was Heinrich Brüning, the chancellor whose overthrow in 1932 had opened the way for Hitler.

Adenauer proved adamant. He made democratic regeneration his first priority as the precondition to integration into Europe. A renewed reputation for reliability was essential. Maneuvering between the superpowers would destroy confidence and repeat historical tragedies.

Adenauer's foreign policy was founded on the moral imperative of democracy. He envisaged a relentless progression toward the twin goals of a security partnership with America and political integration with Europe.

The Petersberg Agreement of 1949 was followed by negotiations over European defense, spurred by the Korean War and the Soviet military buildup in Central Europe. As NATO was forming, Adenauer urged the European nations to pool their efforts into the European Defense Community. After the French Assembly rejected this concept, Adenauer in 1954 agreed to the Paris Accords, which ended West Germany's occupation, affirmed its sovereignty, and opened the way to its national membership in NATO. The culmination was Adenauer's 1955 visit to Washington. When the German national anthem was played as he visited the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, Adenauer described it as the most moving moment of his life.

European integration followed a comparable, in retrospect inevitable, sequence. From France and Germany's 1951 agreement to establish the Coal and Steel Community to the Treaty of Rome in 1957, which established the European Economic Community, Adenauer, working with wise French leaders, overcame one of world history's once-hereditary national animosities.

Within the space of six years, Adenauer had moved his country from an outcast to an equal member in political and security arrangements unprecedented in European history. This was made possible by a spirit of American creativity which, in the Marshall Plan and the origination of NATO, overcame America's pre-World War II isolationism.

The U.S. became Germany's principal link to security through NATO, and to economic recovery through the Marshall Plan. France, as the link to the European Community, played a comparable role. In America, John Foster Dulles symbolized the relationship; in France, President Charles de Gaulle. They both represented to Adenauer elements capable of stabilizing the inevitable storms the future might hold. In that sense, Adenauer viewed Europe as a potential corrective to the fluctuations into which global responsibilities and a certain inherent restlessness on occasion drew the U.S. When, in 1956, Guy Mollet, France's prime minister, stressed a gap between the obligations of NATO and American conduct in the Suez Crisis, Adenauer defended the existing structures as flexible enough to recover shared vitality: "Europe will be your revenge," he said.

I had the privilege of hearing Adenauer's vision in several conversations with him over a 10-year period. His courtesy and serenity were his most memorable traits. Our first meeting took place in 1957, shortly after a Soviet ultimatum threatening Berlin. Adenauer concentrated on the nightmare of everyone privy to nuclear planning: whether any U.S. president would actually bring himself to unleash the catastrophe on which NATO nuclear strategy was based. Since the official answer was formal but the actual one would depend on unknowable contingencies and personalities, he raised the question at every subsequent meeting.

Another major issue preoccupying Adenauer was geopolitical evolution. Did I realize that a break between China and Russia was imminent? The West should prepare for that contingency and not provide too many temptations to its adversaries by its divisions. He construed surprised silence as assent and, on his first visit to the White House in 1961, repeated the prediction, adding, to an astonished President Kennedy: "Professor Kissinger agrees with me."

In 1962, as part-time consultant to President Kennedy, I was asked during a crisis to reassure Adenauer about America's determination and capacity to defend Berlin and support Germany. I had been briefed to present details of some nuclear capabilities and deployments on a personal, presidential basis—information which, at that time, was shared with only the U.K.

As I began my presentation of the political issues, Adenauer interrupted: "They have already told me this in Washington. If it did not convince me there, why would it convince me here?" I replied that I was an academic, and a government employee only a quarter of my time. Adenauer was nonplussed. In that case, he replied: Let us assume you will convince me three-quarters of the way.

But when I presented the military briefing, Adenauer was transformed—partly because of the enormous gap in the West's favor that it demonstrated, but above all because of the confidence President Kennedy had shown in him. It turned into the warmest of all my meetings with him.

A moving aftermath followed some decades later. I received a letter whose sender I did not recognize. He had served as an interpreter during that conversation (though German is my native language, I generally conduct official conversations in English because my vocabulary is more precise, especially on technical matters). Adenauer had given me his word of honor not to distribute the nuclear information I had shared with him. The interpreter informed me that he had, in fact, given a full record of my briefing to Adenauer, who had instructed him to destroy the nuclear portion out of respect for his word of honor.

The historic German-American partnership that began with the Adenauer chancellorship proceeded from almost diametrically opposed starting points. Adenauer assumed office at probably the lowest point of German history. The U.S. was at the zenith of its power and self-confidence. Adenauer saw his task as rebuilding Christian and democratic values through new designs for traditional German and European institutions. America had equally grand objectives and, at times, pursued them with insistent certainty. For Adenauer, the reconstruction of Europe was the rediscovery of ancient values; for America, the implementation of prevailing ones. For Adenauer to succeed, it was necessary to stabilize the soul of Germany; for America, to mobilize existing idealism. Occasionally there were strains, especially when American optimism overestimated the scope for more-fragile structures and divergent historic memories.

The Atlantic relationship between Bonn and Washington transformed, however, the shattered world it inherited and helped create a half-century of peace between major powers.

This system is now under stress from simultaneous upheavals on several continents. Can it heal a fractured world by rediscovering the conviction and creativity with which it was built?

Mr. Kissinger served as national security adviser and secretary of state under Presidents Nixon and Ford. This is adapted from an April 25 speech to the Konrad Adenauer Foundation.

Appeared in the Apr. 29, 2017, print edition.

What to Read Next...

America's Most Anti-Reform Institution? The Media

My Escape From Anxiety

North Korean Missile Launch Appears to Fail

Europe at the Crossroads

America Enters World War I

Independent of The Wall Street Journal newsroom
It's harder than you think to spend down your 401(k) account in retirement

Independent of The Wall Street Journal newsroom
Demi Moore's Manhattan Triplex Penthouse Sells at a $30M Discount

Most Popular Videos
Anxiety Disorder: Is There an Escape?
Newly Developed Device Creates Water From Dry Air
Trump's First 100 Days — in 100 Seconds
Trump Calls Warren 'Pocahontas' and Affirms Commitment to NRA
North Korea's Missile Advancements
Most Popular Articles
U.S. Push for Tougher North Korea Policy Faces Resistance
U.S. Push for Tougher North Korea Policy Faces Resistance
Why Trump Decided to Back Off Nafta Threat
Why Trump Decided to Back Off Nafta Threat
My Escape From Anxiety
My Escape From Anxiety
North Korean Missile Launch Appears to Fail
North Korean Missile Launch Appears to Fail
Brides Are Ditching Bouquets for 13-Pound Clumps of Vegetation
Brides Are Ditching Bouquets for 13-Pound Clumps of Vegetation
Wall Street Journal
Edition: Text Size:
Subscribe NowSign In
WSJ Membership BenefitsDownload WSJ AppsCustomer CenterLegal Policies
Copyright ©2017 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

More than a million patients flock to this website. Drug companies are in hot pursuit. - The Washington Post

The Washington Post
Democracy Dies in Darkness

Brian Banks
Brian Banks
Log out
Newsletters & Alerts
Gift Subscriptions
Contact Us
Help Desk
Home Page U.S. & World | Regional
Newsletters & Alerts
Washington Post Live
Live Chats
Real Estate
WP BrandStudio
1996-2017 The Washington Post
Terms of Service
Privacy Policy
Submissions and Discussion Policy
RSS Terms of Service
Ad Choices

Business Perspective
More than a million patients flock to this website. Drug companies are in hot pursuit.

Inspire chief executive Brian Loew's nine-year-old medical-website business, based in Arlington, has 1.1 million members, 33 employees, nearly $10 million in revenue and will turn its first profit this year. (J. Lawler Duggan/For The Washington Post)

By Thomas Heath Reporter April 28
This isn't Brian Loew's first run at Internet success.

During the thick of the dot-com mania 20 years ago, Loew and some friends built an online publishing company called It had 150 employees and $15 million in revenue but, like many start-ups from the era, it never posted a profit. created website software in the Internet's early days for Elle, Car and Driver, the ill-fated George magazine and other publications.

"I was going to be rich beyond my wildest dreams," Loew said, recounting what his bankers had told him at the time.

Ten days away from the company's initial public offering, the go-go, dot-com age imploded and Loew's path to riches vaporized. The company, which bankers predicted could eventually be worth $1 billion, was sold off for a small fraction of that.

"Investors got their money back, but nobody got rich," Loew said.

The 46-year-old entrepreneur appears to be on to something with a better future this time around. His nine-year-old medical-website business, known as Inspire, has 1.1 million members, 33 employees and nearly $10 million in revenue, and it will turn its first profit this year.

Inspire essentially is a giant, online discussion community where people can use real or assumed names to share experiences, information and advice about their various medical conditions.

"Join many others who understand what you're going through and are making important decisions about their health," says the greeting on Inspire's website.

[Trump calls for lower drug prices, fewer regulations in meeting with pharmaceutical executives]

Loew and his company are attached to the surge of patient assertiveness, with more people questioning their health care and taking more of the responsibility out of the hands of professionals.

"Patient centricity really matters," said Loew, who owns a big chunk of the company, along with investors and employees.

Membership is free and increasing by 1,000 per day. Seventy-eight percent of members are women.

"Women are the chief medical officers of the home," Loew said. "Many of our female members represent a member of the family — husbands, fathers, fathers-in-law, siblings, children. So sometimes a woman would join and say, 'I'm a parent of a 'preemie,' a child of someone with a medical condition, a sister of someone else.' "

The company has a team of community moderators to make sure members get along on chats.

Revenue comes from advertising and from companies looking for hard-to-find patients to participate in clinical drug trials or market research.

Many of the research contracts come from pharmaceutical giants to carry out drug trials or marketing studies on everything from psoriasis (one of the most common ailments among members) to cancer. The contracts can pay anywhere from $50,000 to $750,000, Loew said. It usually amounts to about $1,000 per patient for market research and up to $10,000 for clinical trials.

Inspire's clients include the top 10 pharmaceutical companies in the world, as well as most of the top 25.

"It matters to these companies what patients think and want and how they make decisions," Loew said.

Inspire doesn't advertise to promote itself. It gets exposure from many of its nonprofit-organization partners, such as the American Lung Association, the National Psoriasis Foundation and the Arthritis Foundation. Some members come from posting specific medical terms on Google search, which brings them to Inspire.

[House Freedom Caucus leaders back new health-care plan]

While revenue is split evenly between advertising and research projects, Loew said that there is more upside in research.

One quarter of Inspire's members, or about 250,000 people, are afflicted with rare diseases. They use online searches to find people facing similar challenges. The pool includes people who suffer from relatively rare maladies such as Wilson's disease, pulmonary fibrosis and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor or PNET, which killed Apple co-founder Steve Jobs. A large concentration of PNET sufferers are on Inspire.

The site also has 40,000 members in the community of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, which is a disorder of the tissue surrounding joints.

"What that means is that if you are a researcher trying to study these things, you have trouble finding patients," Loew said. "And we have the patients. The researcher comes to us and we invite the member to participate."

Getting people to open up to researchers is handled delicately. (I confess to a certain unease when it comes to personal health issues online, even though I have written about them for this newspaper.)

Loew said the key is honesty and transparency when approaching members about participating in studies: "Particularly when someone is sick, it's important that they think they are in control. A lot of people are being asked these questions at their most vulnerable moment."

Loew said Inspire emails members, notifying them of a study, describing what it is and informing them how to participate if they would like. "And if they don't respond, we ask more people," he said. "No means no."

If the patient wants to connect with the researcher, Inspire helps them meet and then steps out of the way.

The clients can get pretty specific about what they need. One pharmaceutical company came to Inspire for help in locating hemophilia Type B patients. The search had been going on for two years. Inspire found the patients in two weeks from its membership.

Loew has always had a science bent. He grew up in an upper-middle-class family in Fairfax County. His mother taught elementary school and his father still teaches biomedical engineering at George Washington University.

Loew received his first computer at age 10. He attended the prestigious Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, then double-majored in physics and economics at GWU.

[This doctor's tool kit includes a remedy from the past: House Calls]

After graduating in 1993, he wrote computer code at the World Bank, then worked for Nature, the British science journal. He and some friends started in 1993. The entire arc of the company, including the sell-off in 2000, left him depressed.

"We were so close to going public, and then the world changed," he said, looking back.

He was hired by The Washington Post to help with technology strategy.

The idea for Inspire was born at a 2005 event sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry, in which Loew's wife, an organic chemist, was employed. Several people at the event were in the research-and-development end of the drug business.

"These R&D companies with gigantic budgets described their biggest problem as recruiting patients for clinical trials," he said. "Privacy in America makes it appropriately illegal to buy lists of patients."

A lightbulb went off, he said: "What if you create a social network for patients and caregivers and allow them to raise their hands if they want to participate in clinical trials?"

Economy & Business Alerts
Breaking news about economic and business issues.
Sign up
Loew wrote a business plan to build a website with communities of patients organized by issues: prostate cancer; lung cancer; psoriasis; infertility; preemies.

"The idea was to create a safe, supportive community for patients to gather. If you were diagnosed with something serious," he said, "we knew a community could help with those things. Patients seek other patients to get support and compare notes."

Inspire now inhabits a 6,000-square-foot office in Arlington. Loew expects it to turn its first profit this year.

And It lives on. Some former employees bought the company back. To this day, it writes the secure, daily briefing for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Read more:

These health care entrepreneurs try to keep win streak going

The dentist who became one of the richest people in Washington

A boring business that Warren Buffett would love

Share on FacebookShare
Share on TwitterTweet
Share via Email

Thomas Heath is a local business reporter and columnist, writing about entrepreneurs and various companies big and small in the Washington Metropolitan area. Previously, he wrote about the business of sports for The Post's sports section for most of a decade. Follow @addedvalueth
The Post Recommends

This brutal new poll shows that fewer and fewer people believe Trump's lies
Lies, lies and more lies. And Americans know it.

Trump has galvanized activists on the left. Can they stay energized?
Thousands of groups have sprouted across the country, aimed at resisting the president's agenda.

Kathleen and Hunter Biden's divorce is final, report says
The son of the former vice president is now in a relationship with his brother's widow.

A Monster Performer for This Class of Laptop: Get the Dell XPS 15
A Monster Performer for This Class of Laptop: Get the Dell XPS 15
Windows Central
'SNL' under fire for Kellyanne Conway sketch'SNL' under fire for Kellyanne Conway sketch
'SNL' under fire for Kellyanne Conway sketch
ABC News
Learn the Importance of Having an Estate Plan in Place
Learn the Importance of Having an Estate Plan in Place
Wells Fargo
Homeowners Born Before 1985 Get A Huge Surprise
Homeowners Born Before 1985 Get A Huge Surprise
Painful Periods due to Endometriosis Pain? Learn About an Upcoming Research Study
Painful Periods due to Endometriosis Pain? Learn About an Upcoming Research Study
Equinox Study
Aging Without Wrinkles: 6 Ways to Revitalize Skin
Aging Without Wrinkles: 6 Ways to Revitalize Skin
Diet Doc
Recommended by
Discussion Policy 5 Comments

Mentioned in this story and want to comment? Click here
Brian Banks

What's on your mind?
All Comments
Newest First
Pause live updates
9:25 AM CDT
My wake up call about the state of the so called medical establishment was a fine book, Ending Medical Reversal. Two notable doctors wrote in with input from many Physicians . The two authors are, Vinatak Prasad, and Adam Cifu. With the medical profession and pharma's history of lets do this it should work, to the new drumbeat, nothing should happen, without evidence based trials a whole new world faces patients. The internet has opened up a way for people to do their own research, and not simply proceed with one treatment or instructions.
Ignore UserLikeReportReplyShare
6:50 AM CDT
It's an interesting idea. Cross between patient support and education and hooking potential subjects up with research. I understand that fully half of current research is in the field of medicine/health, probably because that's where the revenue potential is. I'd be very careful about the possibility of exploitation. Doesn't sound like the founder is too concerned, however. He's mainly in it for the wealth.
Ignore UserLikeReportReplyShare
6:12 AM CDT
FDA? Walk to work.
Ignore UserLikeReportReplyShare
4/28/2017 9:32 AM CDT
What a great concept! And keeping a barrier in place between the drug companies and the potential patients is Inspired. It makes the whole thing work for everybody. Congratulations, and I hope it makes a lot of money.
Ignore UserLikeReportReplyShare1
6:48 AM CDT
Not much of a barrier, I think.
Ignore UserLikeReportReply
Most Read
EPA website removes climate science site from public view after two decades
The most common reason people quit their $200,000 tech jobs
At 100 days, Trump's big talk on the economy lacks substance
Trump really needs an economic boom. So far, he's not getting one.
Heineken to Pepsi: Hold my beer
The story must be told.
Subscribe to The Washington Post.
Market Watch
DJIA -0.19% NASDAQ -0.02%

Co. name or symbol
Get quote
Last Update: 04/29/2017(DJIA&NASDAQ)
© 1996-2017 The Washington Post

Help and Contact Us
Terms of Service
Privacy Policy
Print Products Terms of Sale
Digital Products Terms of Sale
Submissions and Discussion Policy
RSS Terms of Service
Ad Choices