Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (16) | Ignore Thread Prev | Next
Author: mauser96 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 204067  
Subject: Re: I'd like to revisit Mauser96's thought Date: 4/3/2013 11:38 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Personally I found CD to be much better than cassette tapes, vastly better in terms of audio quality. As well as less likely to malfunction. So cassettes only seemed satisfactory because there was nothing better, Trinitron TV was only a little better than regular TV, not enough for most people to pay the price .So this patented? technology didn't change the overall market though it did help Sony.
Trinitron never replaced regular cathode ray TV, it took flat screens to do that, and the process was slow. Even things that are noticeably better may take a long time to replace the old technology- example bias tires vs the newer radial tires.

One way to determine whether something is a profitable innovation is noting how long it takes to replace the older device. Too slow a rate of adoption, and the innovation often gets shared with several companies becoming a low margin commodity by the time it gets popular. As an investor I'm mainly interested in quick adoptions. A lot of money to a few companies rather than a little money to many companies..
.
No doubt there are many reasons why new innovative technology may lag. In the case of tires, none of the American companies knew how to make radial tires,their factories weren't set up for that, so they resisted radials in unison. None were willing to take the risk of jumping in quickly. The capital costs were too high for new companies to jump in, though it did give Micheline a US presence.

A couple of examples of rapid uptake- the iPhone, diesel - electric locomotive engines. This sort of rapid change should be the focus if we are trying to find investment money makers. The iPhone concept has been copied rather quickly, there weren't enough barriers to entry even though the adoption rate was quick. Maybe only something like the rare Xerox type patent or the multi billion dollar cost of plants will hold off competition for long, even with innovation.

Where can Apple innovate that will have a rapid take up, quick adoption, and some barrier to entry by others?
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post  
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (16) | Ignore Thread Prev | Next

Announcements

Foolanthropy 2014!
By working with young, first-time moms, Nurse-Family Partnership is able to truly change lives – for generations to come.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Post of the Day:
Macro Economics

Economic Implications of Cuba
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
Community Home
Speak Your Mind, Start Your Blog, Rate Your Stocks

Community Team Fools - who are those TMF's?
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and "#1 Media Company to Work For" (BusinessInsider 2011)! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.
Advertisement