From: Linda (joelinda1@home.com)
Date: Sun Sep 10 2000 - 08:16:34 PDT
Jeff Bone wrote:
<<Best-of-breed tech is *never* top market leader. Why?>>
I read an excellent article on this - I think it was in a recent
issue of Technology Review. The bottom line was that innovative
companies often fail because all of their time and resources are
spent innovating rather than selling their product.
The companies that succeed are ones that may incorporate the
improved technology but aggressively market the product to gain
market share.
Another view point from that Septemeber Red Herring article,
The Second Mover Advantage (no link because it's not yet available
online):
[snip]
Because by definition, first movers are first, they don't have
anyone to copy from; they can't really know what their product
should look like or how it should be used. They can ask consumers,
but they usually don't know at first, either. So the pioneers
can only guess.
They almost never guess right.
Grlygrl201@aol.com wrote:
<<Of course marketing drives sales (duh), but does it compel people to
buy things they don't want? Or does advertising?>>
Great marketing might recast the product in a different light. The
consumer's impression has to change in order to alter buying habits,
and incremental improvements in technology, size, or price alone are
often not enough.
For us computer non-techies, even though a PC with an AMD chip may be
of comparable performance and cheaper, why does it *feel* better
having Intel Inside?
Linda
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Sep 10 2000 - 08:19:33 PDT