In reply to Philip Cohen.

Disruptive innovation has a definition, and it neither includes anything on the Pii360 list, nor does it include alleged criminal activities. In fact, eBay hasn't done anything remotely "disruptive" in the disruption theory sense in at least 17 years, and arguably since shortly after their inception.

I can't speak to Johnny Ho's claims, but if he does indeed claim disruption, then he is misusing the term just as much as the people here at pymnts.com. But, in any case, I'm not sure how your frustration with eBay has anything to do with this article, and your anger at eBay has nothing to do with me either.

The point here is that for us to get anything meaningful from the descriptor "disruptive", the term should be used correctly, and not as hype to suggest "leading edge" or "new" or "high tech" or whatever other empty adjectives the author may have meant. In fact, since we can't possibly interpret what the author meant by using the term, it is worse than useless. It is misleading.