Not Signed-In
Which clippings match 'Market Dominance' keyword pg.1 of 1
25 SEPTEMBER 2013

It's time to kill the idea that Amazon is killing independent bookstores

"Big bookstores are the ones most affected by Amazon's dominance. Borders is long gone. Barnes and Noble isn't in the best health. And Waterstones in Britain has started selling Kindles. The reason? There is very little difference between big, impersonal chain stores selling books and a big, impersonal website selling books. Independent retailers, on the other hand, have a lot to offer that Amazon cannot: niche coffee, atmosphere, serendipitous discoverability of new titles and authors, recommendations from knowledgable staff, signings and events, to name a few."

(Leo Mirani, 24 September 2013, Quartz)

1

TAGS

Amazon KindleAmazon.comambience • American Booksellers Association • Barnes and Noblebooksellersbookstores • Borders (bookshop) • boutique • boutique-publishing • chain storecoffee shopconsumer behaviourconsumptiondiscoverabilityeconomies of scale • Espresso Book Machine • eventsexperience creation • impersonal experience • in-store experienceindependent retailers • knowledgeable staff • market dominancemonopoly • Nate Hoffelder • niche market • obscure titles • recommended by the retailerself-publishingserendipitous discoverabilityserendipityshopping behaviour • signings • small businessesstumbling acrossunexpected gemsWaterstones

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
16 JANUARY 2012

Technological change: The last Kodak moment?

"LENIN is said to have sneered that a capitalist will sell you the rope to hang him. The quote may be spurious, but it contains a grain of truth. Capitalists quite often invent the technology that destroys their own business.

Eastman Kodak is a picture–perfect example. It built one of the first digital cameras in 1975. That technology, followed by the development of smartphones that double as cameras, has battered Kodak's old film– and camera–making business almost to death. ...

While Kodak suffers, its long–time rival Fujifilm is doing rather well. The two firms have much in common. Both enjoyed lucrative near–monopolies of their home markets: Kodak selling film in America, Fujifilm in Japan. A good deal of the trade friction during the 1990s between America and Japan sprang from Kodak's desire to keep cheap Japanese film off its patch.

Both firms saw their traditional business rendered obsolete. But whereas Kodak has so far failed to adapt adequately, Fujifilm has transformed itself into a solidly profitable business, with a market capitalisation, even after a rough year, of some $12.6 billion to Kodak's $220m. Why did these two firms fare so differently?

Both saw change coming. Larry Matteson, a former Kodak executive who now teaches at the University of Rochester's Simon School of Business, recalls writing a report in 1979 detailing, fairly accurately, how different parts of the market would switch from film to digital, starting with government reconnaissance, then professional photography and finally the mass market, all by 2010. He was only a few years out.

Fujifilm, too, saw omens of digital doom as early as the 1980s. It developed a three–pronged strategy: to squeeze as much money out of the film business as possible, to prepare for the switch to digital and to develop new business lines.

Both firms realised that digital photography itself would not be very profitable. 'Wise businesspeople concluded that it was best not to hurry to switch from making 70 cents on the dollar on film to maybe five cents at most in digital,' says Mr Matteson. But both firms had to adapt; Kodak was slower."

(The Economist, 14 January 2012)

Fig.1 John Terret (03 Nov 2011). "Kodak misses the moment", Al Jazeera.

Fig.2 Kodak (1922). "Kodachrome Film Test".

1
2

TAGS

19221975cameracamera-making businesscapitalismcolour • complacency • convergence • death knell • demise • digital cameradisruptive innovationEastman Kodak • film test • FujifilmJapanKodachrome • Kodachrome Film Test • KodakKodak Eastman • Kodak moment • market dominanceobsolescenceold media • picture-perfect • product designradical innovationsmartphonetechnological changetechnological innovationtechnologytechnology innovationVladimir Lenin

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
09 MAY 2011

How Unilever, Coke and the Mini car got it so wrong

"Even the biggest businesses can make big mistakes – and when they do, the result can be a commercial calamity. Companies are constantly striving to improve their products and turn a profit. But changing an existing product can go horribly wrong, leaving customers in revolt and companies in crisis. Mishandled marketing and bungling public relations can make the slickest of businesses look incompetent. And the costs both financially and to reputation can be enormous. Persil, Coca–Cola and the British Motor Corporation have provided some of the most extreme examples as Evan Davis has been finding out for a new BBC Two series."

(BBC News, 8 May 2011)

Business Nightmares with Evan Davis – Doomed Designs will be on BBC Two at 20:00 BST on Monday 9 May 2011

Fig.1 '2009 Mini Cooper Turns Fifty and is Younger than Ever', picture 09ELG550925430AC

1

2

TAGS

195919851990s1994BBC • best-selling • blind taste test • BMC • British Motor Corporation • businesscarcelebrity endorsementCoca-Colacommodity • companies in crisis • customer revolt • customersenterprise • Evan Davis • failure • garmentinnovationJohn Lennon • low price • loyaltymarket dominancemarket leadermarket researchmarketing • Mini (car) • new and improved • New Generation Persil • original formula • original recipe • Pepsi • Pepsi Challenge • Persil • Persil Power • Peter SellersPolaroidpriceProcter and Gambleproductproduct change • product formula • profitpublic relationssoap • soft drink • Spike Milligan • stain • taste (sociology)UKUnilever • washing powder • waste

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
Sign-In

Sign-In to Folksonomy

Can't access your account?

New to Folksonomy?

Sign-Up or learn more.