Original title: Ma Huateng's response to Tencent has no dream: my ideal is not how much money to make
Sihai science and technology news started from writing the first line of code. My ideal is how to make the best product, not how much money to make. I believe many colleagues in the company think so.
Yesterday (May 5) an article entitled "Tencent has no dream" analyzed that Tencent is losing its product ability and entrepreneurial spirit and becoming an investment company. 'the company, which is nearly 20 years old, is becoming utilitarian and short-sighted. Its strength is no longer product business, but investment in finance and technology. '
In response, Ma Huateng, founder of Tencent, said on wechat that after reading the article, it was good to have criticism.
He explained that the reason for the investment is to start from Tencent's core advantages and realize from QQ that the core advantage of social products is traffic. In addition to independently developing multiple business lines and making good use of these flows, we should invest in non core and non professional projects to other more suitable teams, so as to maximize resource utilization and benefits. History always tells us that we should attach importance to new teams and that we can't do everything by ourselves. As for products, this is what we have been reflecting on.
"Apart from the energy caused by many projects, it really needs the product team to have greater determination and patience to make better products. Because this is also my original intention. From the beginning of writing the first line of code, my ideal is how to make the best product, not how much money to make. I believe many colleagues in the company think so. '
Liu Chiping, President of Tencent, said that Tencent is a bigger organization and ecology than the author imagined. Every part of Tencent is pursuing its own ideals and exerting its own strength. It's too narrow to simplify Tencent as a product, a strategic deployment and a person's will. It's ignoring the efforts and achievements of numerous Tencent product teams.
In some products, it is true that what we have done is not good enough, so we should face the difficulties, keep learning, keep correcting errors, and do better. Payment and video are all living examples of long-term struggle from lagging behind to leading. I believe that the products of overtaking on detours will continue to emerge.
Zhang Zhidong, one of the founders of Tencent, also said that when he saw the article last night, there were some false bugs, but sharp criticism was good for goose factory. At the same time, he also believes that there are not enough unique works to change life in goose factory, the internal friction of internal repetition is large, the organization is not suitable for the cloud era, and there is still a long way to go before science and technology can change life, which is both a problem and an opportunity.
The following is the full text of Ma Huateng's response:
Yes, it's good to have criticism.
The reason for the investment is to start from Tencent's core advantages and realize that the core advantage of social products is traffic from QQ.
In addition to independently developing multiple business lines and making good use of these flows, we should invest in non core and non professional projects to other more suitable teams, so as to maximize resource utilization and benefits.
History always tells us that we should attach importance to new teams and that we can't do everything by ourselves. As for products, this is what we have been reflecting on.
Put aside the energy reasons caused by many projects, it really needs the product team to have greater determination and patience to make better products.
Because this is also my original intention. From the beginning of writing the first line of code, my ideal is how to make the best product, not how much money to make. I believe many colleagues in the company think so.
Statement: This article is written by the author of Sohu. Except for Sohu's official account, the opinions only represent the author, not Sohu's position.