Industry Market Trends

We're about to see an onslaught of consulting and IT services firms going big on working with AI platforms to deploy agents in the enterprise. And if you don’t understand why it’s happening, it’s an opportunity to reset your understanding of how the real world works. The real world will need a ton of help actually getting agents going in the enterprise. Companies deal with significant legacy tech stacks they need to modernize, data in tons of fragmented tools, knowledge that isn’t captured or digitized, and change management needed to actually utilize agents effectively. And they have to do all this while still running their business day-to-day, unlike startups, who can generally just design their organizations from the ground up to deploy agents into new workflows designed for them. This is why there is so much opportunity for companies (software or services) to actually deploy agents in specific domains and workflows. This remains a big opportunity for both existing services providers but also tons of new services startups as well. Every new technology wave produces a new era of consulting firms that can deliver on that technology. We're seeing this a ton at Box, both in partnering with new forms of technology consultancies as well as existing systems integrators that are building out all new agentic practice areas to help enterprises work with their unstructured data and agents. These service providers will have the benefit of being able to work across multiple data platforms, as well as see common practices that work or fail within an industry. This knowledge ends up being incredibly valuable right now, especially given how fast things are changing. A corollary to this is also that the forward deployed engineer (FDE) model is going to be alive and well for a long time because companies will want to have their vendor actually help drive the change management and implementation for their new workflows. There’s no shortcut to getting this work done for the enterprise, and the vendors are going to have to do a lot of this or risk low adoption. All of this type of work is going to be in high demand for quite some time, and it's incidentally another example of jobs that aren’t actually going away.

Yesterday, yet another AmLaw100 firm announced a round of layoffs of associates & staff. The layoffs seem to be part of a broader trend driven by slowing demand as a result of rising interest rates. This isn’t the first time that’s happened btw. The legal industry goes through these cycles and usually firms re-hire for those same positions when the economy bounces back. This time might be different, though. Here's why: First, generative AI will enable partners to do more with fewer associates. I’m not sure if the AI is good enough to do that today, but it’ll get there soon. Especially since firms seem to be incorporating it into their workflows right now. When demand eventually returns, these firms will likely have far more tech-enabled processes than they do today—which means they’ll need fewer associates to complete the work. If you want to stay ahead of the curve, pay attention to what legal recruiters are saying about hiring patterns when things bounce back. Second, large clients are more savvy about buying legal services than they’ve ever been. The rise of legal ops over the past decade have helped in-house lawyers make better decisions about where to invest resources. There’s also been an explosion in tech and analytics (e.g. Persuit, SimpleLegal) to help with outside counsel spend. I expect a trend towards greater financial discipline among legal departments, similar to how insurance companies work with their outside lawyers. If you want to stay ahead of the curve, pay attention to rate increase data for various practice areas. Third, there’s an unprecedented amount of high quality talent that now exists outside of traditional Biglaw. The boom-bust nature of the industry means that capable attorneys are constantly being pushed out. It’s not just associates; it’s also partners who are being de-equitized for the sake of PPEP. That, combined with the generational trend towards remote work, rise of boutique / regional firms, and explosion in flex talent providers (e.g. Axiom, Paragon, Latitude). If you want to stay ahead of the curve, pay attention to layoff data & equity partner growth & attrition rates. Now don’t get me wrong. Many AmLaw100 firms and their people will be immune to these trends. Clients will still go to their same go-to firms for high stakes matters, like big time M&A or bet the company litigation. Basically anything that has boardroom visibility. CLOs and GCs are betting their careers on the successful handling of those matters, and they’re not going to be influenced by cost savings or efficiency. As they say, no one ever got fired for hiring Cravath. For everyone else though, you’ve got to stay ahead of the curve. Because it doesn’t matter what school you went to, what firm you worked at, or whether they promised to make you partner. Market dynamics dictate so much of success and failure in our careers—so you always want to be prepared for whatever comes. Good luck my friends. 

The future of footwear may not be manufactured in bulk. It may be fabricated around you. That is what makes this shift so interesting to me. 3D-printed footwear is moving from novelty to a real industrial model, with market forecasts pointing to rapid growth over the next decade. At the same time, brands and manufacturers are using additive manufacturing, digital design, and custom-fit workflows to shorten development cycles and make more personalized products viable. What is new here is not just the printer. It is the system around it: → scan the foot → model the fit digitally → print the part on demand → produce closer to the customer That matters. Because once footwear becomes data-driven and locally fabricated, several things change fast: → fit gets more personal → prototyping gets faster → waste drops because you do not overproduce → inventory pressure falls because you do not need to guess demand the same way To me, that is the bigger signal. This is not just about a better sneaker. It is about a different manufacturing logic. Formlabs notes that 3D printing already enables customized orthotics with better biomechanical precision, lower material waste, and simpler digital workflows. McKinsey has also pointed to digitization and 3D design as a way to shorten design cycles and reduce sampling iterations in apparel and footwear. And once that logic matures, the use cases get much bigger: → custom athletic footwear built from gait and pressure data → hospitals producing orthotics faster and closer to the patient → micro-factories making products on demand instead of stocking shelves → footwear designed for one body, not an average body That is why I think this matters now. The question is no longer whether personalized fabrication is possible. It is whether brands move fast enough before customers start expecting every product to fit like it was made only for them. Would you actually wear a shoe fabricated around your own biometric data? #AI #3DPrinting #Footwear #Manufacturing #Innovation #FutureOfWork #RetailTech #Customization #Technology

Mining software leaders are forming an oligopoly. *Good luck getting mining procurement to approve anything new* A handful of giants are quietly buying up every significant player to create end-to-end "super-suites. This is a classic power grab, designed to create impenetrable moats and lock customers into a single ecosystem. It’s an ancient strategy: acquire every critical piece of the value chain, from geology and planning to fleet management, and then sell the whole bundle as the only "safe" choice for big mining houses. You can see it happening everywhere. Even the equipment manufacturers are getting in on it. Caterpillar has a non-binding proposal to acquire RPMGlobal, which would give it a native planning and scheduling capability. This leaves very few major players standing on their own. Maptek is pretty much the only large, truly independent suite left. The marketing pitch for these giants is about convenience and integration. They sell the idea of "one vendor, one bill, full coverage". But the real drivers are far more self-serving. Once a mine is running on a single integrated platform, the cost and complexity of switching become astronomical. They're selling the removal of choice because big enterprises prefer fewer vendors and are averse to risk. The new narrative to justify this is that data is king. By owning every application, they can collect massive datasets to power a superior "AI flywheel," making their suite smarter and harder to displace. In this new reality, the strategic playbook is completely different depending on your size. The consolidated giants need to sell safety and scale. Their game is to convince the C-suite that choosing their integrated suite is the safe career move. They leverage their large balance sheets and comprehensive stacks to de-risk the procurement process. If you’re one of the last big independents, you can’t compete on breadth, so you must win on depth and focus. This is where you have to become a category creator, not just another vendor in a crowded field. Your marketing has to shift from "we sell a simulation tool" to "we own a simulation for mining". For startups and niche players, the strategy is to find the cracks that the giants are too big and slow to focus on. If the incumbents sell breadth, you must sell unparalleled depth in a specific vertical. While the giants buy attention with massive marketing budgets, startups have to manufacture it by building a cult-like following. Your marketing must be about signaling your unique IP and niche dominance to potential acquirers. What we're witnessing is the predictable maturation of a market. Power is concentrating, and choice is diminishing. The giants win by removing risk, the independents win by framing focus as power, and the startups win by turning their irrelevance into an identity worth acquiring. It's a fascinating chess game, but one that will likely lead to less competition and slower innovation for the end customer.

Five takeaways from the apartment REITs' recent round of earnings calls: 1) Occupancy > Rent Many REITs talked about their long-standing strategies to maximize revenue over rent. And in a high-supply environment where new leases are very competitive to win (even in many coastal cities), that means cutting new lease rents to boost occupancy and protect revenue. (Remember: Vacant units = $0 revenue.) On the upside, renewal demand remains so strong that renewals continue to grow at a solid, normalized pace of 3-5%. Low turnover remains a big upside surprise of 2024; and while low move-outs to purchase is a factor, also give credit to property managers for prioritizing "heads in beds." 2) Supply/Demand balance appears to be turning the corner Supply is the big revenue headwind in 2024. But REITs across the country reported better-than-expected absorption in Q3. And almost across the board, REITs reported increased optimism around the supply outlook. New completions are peaking now in most markets; and while supply will remain elevated over the next few quarters, it's a downward trend. All that said: Austin remains a drag on several REIT (and non-REIT!) portfolios, and that one may take longer to rebound. 3) Renters are in financially strong shape This remains the greatest under-reported story in rental housing (at least for institutional grade, market-rate apartments and SFR specifically). Across the board, REITs reported renter financial health as an improving tailwind. Rent-to-income ratios are going down as wage growth tops rent growth. Bad debt (renter delinquency) is going down. Even in slower-to-recover markets like Los Angeles and Atlanta, where courts are catching up to backlogs, operators have tightened up leasing standards to curb fraud and therefore are able to bring in paying residents as long-term non-payers move out. 4) Ramping back up on construction A bunch of REITs want to be builders again. Now, before you get too excited and assume this means we're about to see a resurgence in starts, consider: REITs have cash / access to cheaper capital than the regional merchant builders who dominate the apartment construction landscape. And they know this, too, so they see now as a time to flex that competitive advantage -- ramping up construction when most others cannot. The floodgates aren't re-opening, but REITs are cautiously ramping up construction again with hopes to deliver in the low-supplied years of 2026-27. 5) It's a tough market to be a buyer Nearly everyone wants to be a buyer of well-located (especially major Sun Belt), newer vintage Class A. Especially recent builds or active lease-ups. But so do a lot of private capital players, too. So REITs reported cap rates falling into the high 4s. Still finding some deals that work, and they're increasingly optimistic that deal flow will accelerate in 2025 as more merchant built lease-ups stabilize and get positioned for sale. #multifamily #reits

Industrial metals (blue) like copper and materials sector (white) are starting the year strong, yet over 5 years meaningfully lag S&P 500 (red). Cyclical plays like these are well positioned this year in a world shaped by supply: ➡️ they sit at the intersection of 3 out of our 5 mega forces: #AI build out, think data centre construction and chips; #geopolitics fragmentation, think defense spending, infrastructure build and rewiring supply chains; and #energy transition, think grid and infra upgrades and renewable projects. They all need industrial metals and materials: sharply increasing demand meets more rigid supply. ➡️ macro tailwinds including rate cuts and growth holding up. This is one of 3 themes I am looking for in q4 reporting season, link to our earnings note in comment.

Critical minerals are no longer simply natural resources. They are becoming strategic infrastructure. As industries accelerate investment in AI, advanced manufacturing, electrification, semiconductors, and next-generation technologies, access to critical minerals is emerging as a defining component of long-term competitiveness. Mineral reserves do not automatically translate into economic advantage. Extraction capacity, processing capability, infrastructure, investment, governance, and resilient supply chains all influence how those resources create value. For business leaders, this extends well beyond the mining sector.  Many organizations now operate in industries that depend on supply chains built around materials they neither produce nor directly control. Understanding where critical resources originate—and how those ecosystems evolve—is an essential element of long-term strategy and operational resilience. Competitive advantage is increasingly shaped not only by innovation, but by the ability to secure the capabilities and resources that make innovation possible.

A few years ago, direct-to-consumer brands were everywhere. They all had a sleek aesthetic, a compelling brand story, and—more often than not—the same product sourced from the same supply chains. Their differentiation lay more in their customer acquisition strategies. The best DTC brands weren’t product companies; they were customer acquisition machines, built on arbitrage opportunities in Facebook and Instagram ads. The newsletter economy is starting to look a lot like that. At a newsletter conference recently, I noticed something: many of the most successful operators don’t think of themselves as publishers. They’re entrepreneurs first, content creators second. Their goal isn’t to build an editorial brand—it’s to master acquisition, churn prevention, and lifetime value. They take a unit economics approach to publishing that isn't nearly as pronounced in institutional media. And the risk, just like in DTC, is this model works until the arbitrage disappears. In DTC, ad costs skyrocketed, and many brands collapsed when they had to compete on product, not just marketing. In newsletters, AI-generated content and inbox algorithms could make traditional acquisition strategies obsolete. The playbook of buying cheap attention and then arbitrage with ads, front-end offers, courses and the like will grow harder. The newsletters that survive will be the ones that go beyond audience hacking and build actual brands with real differentiation. Because at some point, every industry—whether it’s skincare, mattresses, or newsletters—has to stop relying on growth hacks and start competing on substance.

I have always been fascinated by how dining habits evolve with social and economic shifts. In India, the geography of dining is changing before our eyes. Urban dine-in remains important, but the real momentum is building in suburbs, tier-2 towns, and through delivery platforms. The food services market in India is expected to grow from about Rs 5.5 lakh crore today to close to Rs 10 lakh crore by 2030. Online delivery is projected to account for nearly a fifth of that pie. Cloud kitchens, which were once considered experimental, are becoming mainstream. They already represent over a billion dollars in value and are projected to triple by the end of the decade. This is not just about efficiency. It is about creating hospitality in new forms, wherever the diner chooses to be. For me, these numbers are not abstract. They are signals. They tell us how restaurants must rethink design, reach, and experience. Here is how I see it: 1/ Suburbs and tier-2 cities are emerging as powerful growth engines. 2/ Cloud kitchens can extend a brand’s presence without diluting its identity. 3/ Delivery and hybrid formats demand the same attention to quality and consistency as a flagship restaurant. The future of dining in India belongs to businesses that understand these shifts deeply and adapt with clarity. As someone who lives and breathes this industry every day, I see this as a moment of great possibility. #India #Hospitality #Future #Trends #Growth #Success