[unclebucknasty]

I understand what the article was saying and I don't disagree. In fact, I'm saying it's obvious. Your explanation effectively repeated it, using equally vague terms.

And that was my point. The author says that LinkedIn needs to find a completely different revenue model in midstream that works for them and that its users love. Do you think there's really a revelation in there? Do you think that's never occurred to LinkedIn (or anyone who's paying attention)?

Making vague and obvious statements as a commentator is also easy. For the article to have value, it should have offered some concrete examples of how these problems could be solved.