5 ms·

I wish articles like this would more seriously engage with the possible value of First Mover Advantage in certain circumstances and industries. You can do this

I wish articles like this would more seriously engage with the possible value of First Mover Advantage in certain circumstances and industries. You can do this while recognizing that implementation is key.

shoto_io 5y ago
If I remember correctly according to Jim Collins (author of the classic From Good To Great), there is no such thing as a first mover advantage. They looked at lateral data. I will try to find the quote. EDIT: found it in “Beyond Entrepreneurship 2.0”, great book btw. Highly recommended > Where does this leave us with respect to a market pioneer strategy versus a market follower strategy? It’s clear that there are advantages to being a market leader. You can lock up customers. You can build early market share and gain a dominant trade name. You can get down the learning curve. You can sometimes gain patent protection. You can benefit from high margins, and use the resulting cash flow to fund further product development and marketing. But—and this is key—taking a market pioneer strategy is not, in itself, enough. Being first will not protect you forever; you also have to execute well. Of course, the ideal position—and the one pursued by many great companies—is to strive for being both first and best.
- the-dude 5y ago
  I remember a recollection here on HN from a developer : he thought the idea was great and they were totally on to something completely new. The sales guy said : yeah, but I don't know where the market is, how big it is or how much I can charge. Disclaimer : these are my words.
unionpivo 5y ago
> First Mover Advantage This implies you are moving. If your idea is still on idea stage, you are not being first mover. You are a dreamer. Most of the time First Mover Advantage becomes obvious only after the fact. So I would not loose too much sleep over it.
megaman821 5y ago
Do you have any good examples of the First Mover Advantage? The most successful companies in many categories appear to not be first-movers (Google/search, Facebook/social, VW/cars, Sony/consoles). You would think by shear chance there would be more first-movers that lead a category.
dalbasal 5y ago
Engage as in "treat it as important?" IMO first mover advantage is even less worthfull than "ideas." Two reasons: One, first mover advantages rarely determine winners. Google followed altavista. FB followed Myspace. iphone followed N95s, palm pilot, blackberry, etc. Those earlier versions also had precedents, and for each precedent there are hundreds of attempts at creating commercial products. Second, timescales. The above examples are years and decades. The typical founder pushing NDAs on everyone and their cat is thinking in months. There are almost no cases where someone is going to entrench themselves in an industry or create network effect in months. If they do, it's probably down to great execution anyway. It's not that first mover advantage doesn't exist, it's just a smaller factor relative to execution. Competition generally, is unlikely to be a major factor. Also "major" and "minor" are a different sort of beast for a startup. Statistically, a startup has a very low chance of success. Say the chance of success is 5%. You can think of that as 50% chance of not being executed at all. 30% chance of being executed poorly. 10% chance of failing to appeal to customers/users. 2% chance of dying because of founder disputes. 1% chance of being a stupid idea. 0.5% chance of being killed by competition. etc.
- elicash 5y ago
  There’s conflicting research on the topic. People should engage with ideas seriously, yes.
  - dalbasal 5y ago
    Re: research. I'm not sure that academic research is the arbiter of business topics like this. In any case, we are engaging with the idea right now. This article didn't "engage" in the sense that it doesn't mention it, but you can't expect every article to mention it. I also don't think it's very important, as a consideration. Engage seems euphemistic to me. What do you mean by it.. that people should rank it more highly as a factor? If so, why not make that case?
    - elicash 5y ago
      "Engage" is not euphemistic. I'm surprised you're unfamiliar with the word. It means receiving interest or attention.
arkitaip 5y ago
A lot of the times a company that seems to be a first mover is actually part of the Nth wave of a particular tech. Facebook wasn't the first social network but it might seem like it if you define the market narrowly enough. Google didn't do web search first, either. Sometimes it takes decades and centuries for tech to mature because people and societies move slowly.

shoto_io 5y ago

If I remember correctly according to Jim Collins (author of the classic From Good To Great), there is no such thing as a first mover advantage. They looked at lateral data. I will try to find the quote. EDIT: found it in “Beyond Entrepreneurship 2.0”, great book btw. Highly recommended > Where does this leave us with respect to a market pioneer strategy versus a market follower strategy? It’s clear that there are advantages to being a market leader. You can lock up customers. You can build early market share and gain a dominant trade name. You can get down the learning curve. You can sometimes gain patent protection. You can benefit from high margins, and use the resulting cash flow to fund further product development and marketing. But—and this is key—taking a market pioneer strategy is not, in itself, enough. Being first will not protect you forever; you also have to execute well. Of course, the ideal position—and the one pursued by many great companies—is to strive for being both first and best.

the-dude 5y ago
I remember a recollection here on HN from a developer : he thought the idea was great and they were totally on to something completely new. The sales guy said : yeah, but I don't know where the market is, how big it is or how much I can charge. Disclaimer : these are my words.

unionpivo 5y ago

> First Mover Advantage This implies you are moving. If your idea is still on idea stage, you are not being first mover. You are a dreamer. Most of the time First Mover Advantage becomes obvious only after the fact. So I would not loose too much sleep over it.

megaman821 5y ago

Do you have any good examples of the First Mover Advantage? The most successful companies in many categories appear to not be first-movers (Google/search, Facebook/social, VW/cars, Sony/consoles). You would think by shear chance there would be more first-movers that lead a category.

dalbasal 5y ago

Engage as in "treat it as important?" IMO first mover advantage is even less worthfull than "ideas." Two reasons: One, first mover advantages rarely determine winners. Google followed altavista. FB followed Myspace. iphone followed N95s, palm pilot, blackberry, etc. Those earlier versions also had precedents, and for each precedent there are hundreds of attempts at creating commercial products. Second, timescales. The above examples are years and decades. The typical founder pushing NDAs on everyone and their cat is thinking in months. There are almost no cases where someone is going to entrench themselves in an industry or create network effect in months. If they do, it's probably down to great execution anyway. It's not that first mover advantage doesn't exist, it's just a smaller factor relative to execution. Competition generally, is unlikely to be a major factor. Also "major" and "minor" are a different sort of beast for a startup. Statistically, a startup has a very low chance of success. Say the chance of success is 5%. You can think of that as 50% chance of not being executed at all. 30% chance of being executed poorly. 10% chance of failing to appeal to customers/users. 2% chance of dying because of founder disputes. 1% chance of being a stupid idea. 0.5% chance of being killed by competition. etc.

elicash 5y ago
There’s conflicting research on the topic. People should engage with ideas seriously, yes.
- dalbasal 5y ago
  Re: research. I'm not sure that academic research is the arbiter of business topics like this. In any case, we are engaging with the idea right now. This article didn't "engage" in the sense that it doesn't mention it, but you can't expect every article to mention it. I also don't think it's very important, as a consideration. Engage seems euphemistic to me. What do you mean by it.. that people should rank it more highly as a factor? If so, why not make that case?
  - elicash 5y ago
    "Engage" is not euphemistic. I'm surprised you're unfamiliar with the word. It means receiving interest or attention.

arkitaip 5y ago

A lot of the times a company that seems to be a first mover is actually part of the Nth wave of a particular tech. Facebook wasn't the first social network but it might seem like it if you define the market narrowly enough. Google didn't do web search first, either. Sometimes it takes decades and centuries for tech to mature because people and societies move slowly.