4 ms·

My understanding with Kodak is that they invented digital tech far earlier than expected (pre 80s) and hushed it to avoid cannibalizing their existing film busi

by RickS 8y ago

My understanding with Kodak is that they invented digital tech far earlier than expected (pre 80s) and hushed it to avoid cannibalizing their existing film business. I suspect Blockbuster behaved similarly. It's hard to kill the golden goose. Still examples of the sunk cost fallacy, for sure, but it feels like "lack of realization" is perhaps the wrong attribution.

matt_s 8y ago
In a way, it is sunk cost all the way down. Those companies' entire existance - supply chain, manufacturing, down to identity of what they do was so etched into everything it was hard to change.
- nvarsj 8y ago
  It happens all the time with large companies. Motorola is another, mostly forgotten example. They invented digital radios for cell phones, but they were so entrenched in analog radios at the time that they gave the technology away to a small company called Nokia. A few years later, they collaborated with Apple on an iTunes equipped cell phone, and shared their own internal designs of a full screen phone. I think this phenomenon is one of the few ways a big company can die.
tonyedgecombe 8y ago
I don't think Kodak did hush it, they had some pretty advanced digital cameras early on, they were pioneers. The problem was they were a film company not a camera company, those businesses are so distinct they were never likely to cross from one to the other. They would have been better ignoring the whole digital camera thing and looking for other opportunities where they could leverage their skills and assets. Or just wound down gracefully.
- danieltillett 8y ago
  Kodak saw what was coming ahead of everyone else (they owned the digital camera field from the mid 1970 onwards), but it did them no good. The problem was there just is not as much money in digital photography compared to chemical photography. Kodak is a classic example that no amount of foresight will save you when the entire industry changes underneath you.

by RickS 8y ago

matt_s 8y ago

In a way, it is sunk cost all the way down. Those companies' entire existance - supply chain, manufacturing, down to identity of what they do was so etched into everything it was hard to change.

nvarsj 8y ago
It happens all the time with large companies. Motorola is another, mostly forgotten example. They invented digital radios for cell phones, but they were so entrenched in analog radios at the time that they gave the technology away to a small company called Nokia. A few years later, they collaborated with Apple on an iTunes equipped cell phone, and shared their own internal designs of a full screen phone. I think this phenomenon is one of the few ways a big company can die.

tonyedgecombe 8y ago

I don't think Kodak did hush it, they had some pretty advanced digital cameras early on, they were pioneers. The problem was they were a film company not a camera company, those businesses are so distinct they were never likely to cross from one to the other. They would have been better ignoring the whole digital camera thing and looking for other opportunities where they could leverage their skills and assets. Or just wound down gracefully.

danieltillett 8y ago
Kodak saw what was coming ahead of everyone else (they owned the digital camera field from the mid 1970 onwards), but it did them no good. The problem was there just is not as much money in digital photography compared to chemical photography. Kodak is a classic example that no amount of foresight will save you when the entire industry changes underneath you.