The idea that big players are Borg-like (#) in their perfect ability to anticipate and assimilate all great and threatening innovations is at odds with my own e

The idea that big players are Borg-like (#) in their perfect ability to anticipate and assimilate all great and threatening innovations is at odds with my own experience. The current crop of behemoths may be better than their predecessors, but it's still the case that they are much slower and less efficient at deciding and doing things than startups are. They are still myopically focused on current profit centers and fraught with strategy taxes. They are still arrogant and inflexible. (At least in my experience.) Having helped build a startup (ITA Software) up to 500 employees, I was struck by the degree to which even companies whose leadership tries to do the right thing accrue politics, time-wasting, heavyweight processes, and outright antibodies to good ideas. And don't even get me started on working with other, much bigger companies. The cost basis argument might be right; maybe it does take more money now to get a fully-formed, defensible product to market. That's exactly the phenomenon that has lead to the consolidation of the video game business; it takes 100+ people to make a AAA title now. I don't see the same thing happening with consumer internet startups, generally though -- in fact, it seems the opposite: with iOS apps, for example, the entry cost is low, but upside is also relatively limited (compared to, say, Google). (#) a phrase from one of David's own replies