5 ms·
largely true of pharma companies as well - they are largely big marketing organizations, where most of the real R&D is done by small startups that can be purcha
by ejb999 3y ago
largely true of pharma companies as well - they are largely big marketing organizations, where most of the real R&D is done by small startups that can be purchased when necessary.
- fullarr 3y agoIt feels like part of it is a cultural issue. People in the startup space largely seem uninterested in starting companies they will run their whole life They just want the fun of experimentation and a payday And like that's fine whatever, live your life, but it's creating a really crappy feedback loop of monopolization and buy outs
- nickpp 3y agoAny single Nx buyout results in N additional startups being funded. This is how VC culture operates and grows. It’s one of the main ingredients that build Silicon Valley’s success. Other countries are desperate to copy this model.
- fullarr 3y agoI'm not arguing that it doesn't work and create a feedback loop I'm arguing it's destructive long-term by creating a Goliath no one can compete with Or several Goliaths in this case Consolidation leads to stagnation
- nickpp 3y agoGoliaths were and will always be around. But as long as there is an unregulated, free market - there will always be startups competing. It’s not easy, but it’s doable through innovation and creativity. The Goliaths are always more conservative, slower and less agile.
- gmerc 3y agoThat’s libertarian religious scripture that needs to be backed up by solid facts.
- seniorivn 3y agothe only solid fact that you need is that tech giants of the past are not tech giants today, and the same way MS missed mobile market, Nokia failed with touchscreen smartphones, atnt and its parts failed to innovate, ibm lost and left pc/x86server etc, current giants are likely to loose. The only difference now is that the biggest competition today is from foreign companies that leads to them being able to get support of government and therefore compete not on the basis of merit, but in a political way.
- JohnFen 3y ago> the only solid fact that you need is that tech giants of the past are not tech giants today That's far from the only solid fact you need to know, though. You need to know the conditions and circumstances around it all.
- seniorivn 3y agowell, there is an assumption, that the circumstances are a political/economical system which is the same one. But there is an argument to be made about deterioration of institutions
- NalNezumi 3y agoAnd it's a huge assumption. To the level of "you can ignore friction" for middle school physics class. You need to look no further back than the robber barons to see "tech" (yes they were tech, not in the modern sense but industrial) and how it required massive political mobilization to get rid off. It wasn't "free market" that did it, in matter of fact it perpetuated the monopolistic behavior. We can cherry pick history all day. The point is that "only required argument is historic" is stupidity, and often requires assumptions, cherry picking and nitpicking
- marssaxman 3y agoDifferent stages of the corporate life cycle require different skills and attract people with different temperaments; someone who launches a startup is not necessarily going to be great at running it for their whole life, nor feel fulfilled by doing so. I prefer to work for startups whether they yield a "payday" or not - they usually don't - because huge organizations and complex bureaucracies leave me feeling miserable and demotivated.
- xyzelement 3y agoMaybe that’s fine? A company that can do cutting edge research and a company that can manufacture and market at scale don’t have to be the same company.
- sparrowInHand 3y agoThere is a invisible incentive filter though- nobody will create a startup that is not worth buying for a large company - or whos product would cannibalize somebody elses product in the oligopoly.
- xyzelement 3y agoI am not sure that's true (is it?) but more so, don't see how that follows from Pharma's alleged focus on acquisition. Can you give me an example where in a different world something good would happen that isn't happening now and why? I am not trying to be difficult just genuine don't see it yet.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- rustymonday 3y agoYou're right. More and more pharmaceutical manufacturing is contracted out to CDMOs. So one day big pharma might only do marketing.
- throw0101c 3y ago> where most of the real R&D is done by small startups that can be purchased when necessary. Or by governments.
- tnecniv 3y agoThis has a practical aspect that is different from software though. Bringing a drug to market requires a huge amount of capital and very specialized manufacturing. It’s very difficult for a small company to do that. I’m not saying it’s a good system necessarily, but it’s a big factor worth acknowledging and different from a tech start up.