4 ms·
I’m mixed on this thought that they are stifling innovation. On one hand, yes, they have a habit of commoditizing their complements by acquisition or fast follo
by malandrew 6y ago
I’m mixed on this thought that they are stifling innovation. On one hand, yes, they have a habit of commoditizing their complements by acquisition or fast following. On the other hand, they most often have built the platforms that have made such complements possible in the first place.
It seems more like an innovation trade off relative to other innovators, but a net gain relative to other areas of society that are either innovation neutral (most of non-tech non-science society) or innovation destructive (politicians except when they are listening to advice from the EFF).
- Nasrudith 6y agoYeah acquisition itself can have a positive role in innovation from specialization of capabilities. The VC model often is based upon "growth then monetize" and the monetization and creation skillsets don't always overlap. Imagine a hypothetical world where anyone buying start ups was forbidden. Someone capable of building something new but not monetizing it would be less incentivized than if they could be bought out. Others would be encouraged to roll their own for redundancy of labor as there are downsides to building dependencies upon things you don't have full control over. The current system is not a perfect system by any means but it does have merits.