Winner Takes Most • Hacker News Board

Re: Winner Takes Most

#11

Post by lifeisstillgood » Fri, Oct 23, 2015, 12:16 AM UTC

rwmj wrote: post #2

Is there a business in creating/investing in only market follower companies? They won't ever be the biggest, but they might take 10% of a market, and the winner has done all the hard work of proving that the market exists and creating a viable product.

Rocket Internet will, with justification, claim they are a "incubator". I don't know how much stock they take (or more likely give) but the idea of copying consumer sites and reproducing in different locales seems ... Brilliant and off putting at the same time.

Yet "competitors are Gods way of telling you there is money in the market" so perhaps we should all follow this idea more. For example I am looking at setting up a blockchain development company. I doubt that is unique. I don't feel like a copycat however.

I wonder why not?

Re: Winner Takes Most

#12

Post by trjordan » Fri, Oct 23, 2015, 12:17 AM UTC

Is this always true?

Or can we just not come up with compelling counter-examples, because the brands that won in their category are more compelling than the brands that split a category?

Re: Winner Takes Most

#13

Post by gbhn » Fri, Oct 23, 2015, 12:33 AM UTC

"The Chinese have dealt with that issue by protecting their market."

Can anyone explain why this ends up not being a bigger international trade issue? It seems to me like it would be a giant flashpoint, but it seems not to be.

Re: Winner Takes Most

#14

Post by willchang » Fri, Oct 23, 2015, 12:50 AM UTC

Something's going on that's more than just network effects. Google was arguably not the first dominant search/advertising company, and Facebook was not the first social network, etc. But these companies can convince very good engineers that it's more profitable to join them than to compete against them, whereas their predecessors failed to do that. How they do this merits more investigation.

Re: Winner Takes Most

#15

Post by roymurdock » Fri, Oct 23, 2015, 12:58 AM UTC

gbhn wrote: post #13

"The Chinese have dealt with that issue by protecting their market." Can anyone explain why this ends up not being a bigger international trade issue? It seems to me like it would be a giant flashpoint, but it seems not to be.

What makes you think it chinese protectionism would be a trade issue? Not trying to be sardonic, just curious.

Re: Winner Takes Most

#16

Post by mikeash » Fri, Oct 23, 2015, 1:07 AM UTC

brandnewlow wrote: post #7

cryptoz wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, certainly. I would say that for a long time Apple was an excellent example of that, maybe even still today if your metrics are market share (instead of profit/revenue). Most of Apple's products are follower products - as in, they enter a maturing space where much of the market research and hard technological work has already been done. Once they enter the market with a better product that is released after the e…

I was watching the the iPhone launch video last night and what you're saying is very apropos. Apple was able to piggyback on the failures of existing smartphones to tell a powerful product story: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hUIxyE2Ns8

This is why I'm so surprised that they released a watch. The smart watch market was tiny and extremely immature. To jump in when they did is very different from their previous winning formula. It will be interesting to see how it works out.

Re: Winner Takes Most

#17

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Oct 23, 2015, 1:14 AM UTC

willchang wrote: post #14

Something's going on that's more than just network effects. Google was arguably not the first dominant search/advertising company, and Facebook was not the first social network, etc. But these companies can convince very good engineers that it's more profitable to join them than to compete against them, whereas their predecessors failed to do that. How they do this merits more investigation.

[deleted]

Re: Winner Takes Most

#18

Post by masonicb00m » Fri, Oct 23, 2015, 1:16 AM UTC

"Lately, we’ve been wondering if there is an end to this pattern on the Internet and mobile. We think it is possible that an open data platform, in which users ultimately control their data and the networks they choose to participate in, could be the thing that undoes this pattern of winner takes most." Urbit?

Re: Winner Takes Most

#19

Post by justicezyx » Fri, Oct 23, 2015, 1:38 AM UTC

gbhn wrote: post #13

"The Chinese have dealt with that issue by protecting their market." Can anyone explain why this ends up not being a bigger international trade issue? It seems to me like it would be a giant flashpoint, but it seems not to be.

lmao ebay was in China, rket by Taobao msn was in China, rket by Tecent

Re: Winner Takes Most

#20

Post by jacquesm » Fri, Oct 23, 2015, 1:41 AM UTC

willchang wrote: post #14

Something's going on that's more than just network effects. Google was arguably not the first dominant search/advertising company, and Facebook was not the first social network, etc. But these companies can convince very good engineers that it's more profitable to join them than to compete against them, whereas their predecessors failed to do that. How they do this merits more investigation.

> How they do this merits more investigation.

It's easy:

The first group they get straight out of the gate with the certainty of 150K+ salaries for as long as they're employed. Life-style adapts to new stream of income, hooked, threat of potential start-up neutralized.

The second group goes against the grain, refuses the initial bait and starts a competitor and then gets bought out at a significant multiple of their real life value - if you ignore the threat to the top dog. If you don't ignore that threat it makes good business sense.