I'm leaning towards DMeisterJ's side on this one.
His writing can certainly be entertaining at times. He has posted some witty, clever ideas on his articles before.
But is Malstrom a good writer? I don't think many would dare call him that.
Some people have stated on this thread that to properly understand the context of what he's trying to convey, you HAVE to read all the other stuff he has written before.
Isn't doing that, by definition, become exactly what he was trying to criticize? When you have to write countless paragraphs of pretentious text, all the while claiming that you are the one in the know, that the rest of the so-called ''analysts'' are idiots, then you are behaving as egotistically as the companies that ''do not take the consumer into account''.
In other words, if you need a tutorial (i.e. reading his previous essays) to properly understand what he's trying to prove, then his latest article is, as DMeister calls it, a contradiction.
And I am NOT a hater. I have genuinely enjoyed some of the stuff he's written. You just have to dig deep into the trash to find the valuable diamonds that are buried in there. I recommend reading the articles. However, if a condensed, ''cliff notes'' version of the articles surface one day, by all means read those instead. You'll save a huge amount of time and get the gist of what he's attempting to prove.
Make sure the shadow you chase is not the one you cast.
