Disruptive Thoughts - Latest Comments in Innovation Capitalists

Re: Innovation Capitalists

Dave Bayless — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:04:52 -0000

DC's observations are apt, in my firm's experience to-date as a pioneering IC. The logic of collaboration between a large firm and a small firm is compelling: Small firms offer access to prospective innovation; and large firms offer established manufacturing, distribution, and marketing capacities. Nevertheless, asymmetric collaborations are very difficult due to sharp differences in strategic intent and pacing. It does take time to cultivate the requisite level of mutual trust.

Re: Innovation Capitalists

Dave Bayless — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 07:04:52 -0000

Re: Innovation Capitalists

DC — Sun, 27 May 2007 17:58:23 -0000

I love the concept! One-to-one it may have a chance, one-to-many is problematic.

For the model to be financially viable the IC firm must be able to market their concepts to multiple companies to create a demand market for their supply. This allows for market driven pricing and counters the all eggs in one basket dilemma. Unfortunately, that is a challenge. For the IC to partner with an interested company they must have a substantial amount of visibility into strategic agenda and branding areas that most companies aren't willing to part with without a tight non-compete, non-disclosure. The IP issues are pervasive with an open market approach.

If I'm Microsoft Games (XBOX 360-people) why should I give you insight into my strategic development goals and then have you go out and develop a product that you can sell to Sony (Playstation 3-people) or Nintendo (wii-people)? What if that product is a huge success and I Microsoft with deeeeep pockets pursue legal actions against the IC firm?

A consortium approach to an open IC market may work - over tiiiimmeeee - only if there is a market generated price and not collusion.

Re: Innovation Capitalists

DC — Sun, 27 May 2007 16:58:23 -0000

I love the concept! One-to-one it may have a chance, one-to-many is problematic. For the model to be financially viable the IC firm must be able to market their concepts to multiple companies to create a demand market for their supply. This allows for market driven pricing and counters the all eggs in one basket dilemma. Unfortunately, that is a challenge. For the IC to partner with an interested company they must have a substantial amount of visibility into strategic agenda and branding areas that most companies aren't willing to part with without a tight non-compete, non-disclosure. The IP issues are pervasive with an open market approach. If I'm Microsoft Games (XBOX 360-people) why should I give you insight into my strategic development goals and then have you go out and develop a product that you can sell to Sony (Playstation 3-people) or Nintendo (wii-people)? What if that product is a huge success and I Microsoft with deeeeep pockets pursue legal actions against the IC firm? A consortium approach to an open IC market may work - over tiiiimmeeee - only if there is a market generated price and not collusion.

Re: Innovation Capitalists

Ashish — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 09:21:53 -0000

Quite rightly stated...Innovative capitalist it seems will be a major impetus towards value creation in future...These people have aptly put that Innovation is the product of Creativity and Execution, and with the help of the Innovation Capitalist, the execution part will be more streamlined in the industry.

P.S.: Am following ur posts for quite sometime...seems slick & profound.

Best.

Re: Innovation Capitalists

Ashish — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 08:21:53 -0000

Quite rightly stated...Innovative capitalist it seems will be a major impetus towards value creation in future...http://www.fastcompany.com/resources/leadership/v...rel="nofollow">These people have aptly put that Innovation is the product of Creativity and Execution, and with the help of the Innovation Capitalist, the execution part will be more streamlined in the industry. P.S.: Am following ur posts for quite sometime...seems slick & profound. Best.