Another way to think of this: the likelihood of “new Y” being invented and succeeding is small, in any circumstance. The circumstances that lead to Y’s existenc

Another way to think of this: the likelihood of “new Y” being invented and succeeding is small, in any circumstance. The circumstances that lead to Y’s existence are very contingent. The default is for Y to fail, or not to exist in the first place. The established company became so because they made X succeed, which itself was unlikely. So what are the chances that the same organization would also make Y succeed? Multiply the probabilities. So yes, it’s politics and incentives, but we must also beg the question a bit further upstream. It’s why I marvel at questions like, why didn’t Microsoft invent the iPhone. The better question is, why would it? Tim Lee lays it out nicely here: http://www.forbes.com/sites/timothylee/2012/05/27/two-views-of-innovation/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/timothylee/2012/05/27/two-views-...