The origin-to-distribute business model is in many ways like a self-aware and self-aware model. The difference is that the self-aware model is more like a self-aware model. A self-aware model is self-aware but is self-aware nonetheless. Like a self-aware model, the origin-to-distribute business model involves a few major elements.
The first is the creation of a self-aware distribution network. In a self-aware model, the creator doesn’t really have to know anything about the problem at hand. The creator creates a network that provides the necessary information and expertise to other people. For example, a self-aware model might ask a local pizza shop to send a delivery. Or a self-aware model might take a self-aware distribution network provider to a meeting and pitch them on how they could help.
The problem is that this means that the creator of the network is also the party that is really the initiator. A non-self-aware model might ask a local pizza shop to deliver the pizza. The creator of the network is not the initiator because the initiator does not really know anything about the problem. The creator is simply doing the hard work of finding out about the problem and providing the information and expertise required to solve it.
The principal-agent problem is like the principal-agent problem in computer science. It’s not a problem per se, but rather a problem in the very core of the way that people think about things. The creator of the network makes a bad business decision when he tries to take on the role of the initiator. He’s trying to make a profit, but he’s really just trying to put together the initial infrastructure that can support this new innovation.
In the first few days of the Origin-to-Distribution project, the people working on the project have been working under the assumption that all of the infrastructure that will help them bring this new service to market will be provided by an organization called Origin One.
The principal-agent problem occurs when the initiator cannot or will not act in his own self interests. A principal cannot be a member of a group. An agent cannot act for the sake of the agent. The principal-agent problem is similar to the one that a computer program has to overcome when it thinks its self-interest is aligned with the interests of the group. A principal can’t act for the sake of another principal.
Although Origin One is a new company, we think it’s a natural extension of the company’s already successful enterprise model. As we mentioned earlier, Origin One is the company that provides the software that makes our games work, but it’s also the company that allows us to do things that are just a little easier to do. It’s essentially what you’d call a service that anyone can pick up and use without asking anyone else.
The principle-agent problem is when two principals have conflicting interests. Each principal wants to do something they deem better for the other, but the agent is not allowed to do it. As a result, the agent is forced to either give up their best offer, or take the less attractive option. This was a big problem for the early days of interactive television.
In the early days of interactive television the principals didn’t have their own personal agents. They often worked for the same company, and they were forced to make their final decision together. The principal wants to make money and the agent wants to get a big piece of advertising. The agent is not in a position to make the principal happy, and so the agent can’t offer an attractive offer. The result is a vicious circle.
The principal and agent have a conflict of interest. The principal wants to make money but the agent wants to make the agent happy. So the agent has no choice but to become a principal, and the agent can only take the money. That’s the principal-agent problem.