4 ms·
> A common root of the issue, I believe, is looking at already successful products and imagining how they could be iterated upon or diverged from in new and int
by Eikon 6y ago
> A common root of the issue, I believe, is looking at already successful products and imagining how they could be iterated upon or diverged from in new and interesting ways. Such divergent ideas are often very reasonable, good even, the problem is that they require the same scale to work as the products they are based upon.
This assertion just assumes there's no room for optimization and / or improvement on already commercialized products and that the originating company got everything right in the first place.
A product can be sold a ton of ways. Slights tweaks to the strategy and / or to the product itself can sometimes be game changing.
That's not because a product is successful at huge scale that it can't be successful at smaller scale.
- jstanley 6y ago> This assertion just assumes there's no room for optimization and / or improvement on already commercialized products and that the originating company got everything right in the first place. It's not saying the improvement isn't an improvement, it's just saying that the improvement is useless until you reach sufficient scale.
- hinkley 6y agoThat's not always a nonstarter. Truly new work might involve establishing an entire supply chain for a product line. Followers can reuse some of your work, if you haven't locked up all of the capacity. Commoditization of your complements stops your complements from competing with you, but also opens you up to other competitors.