Really interesting post – loved learning about how Kodak actually invented the digital camera back in the 70s.
What do you think was the main reason Kodak didn’t evolve into an Olympus-type player (i.e. with a big presence in medical imagining)? Was it that their R&D efforts were too scattered? Did they just not see the storm clouds coming with digital?
What’s troubling to me about this company is their ownership of (and ability to monetize) other peoples’ genetic data. At its core, genetic data is the most personal, private, and valuable healthcare data out there. How does 23andme’s model allow for the individuals sending their data to share in the company’s commercial success? Is there a threat that competitors come out with a better model and value proposition for incentivizing individuals to send data?
Really interesting research. Do you think the decision to hire a multitude of PhDs was evidence that they did not have a versatile enough technology to monetize? I.e. if they had a great technology that they just needed to operationalize, they could have just hired the necessary engineers to build product and sell. Spending so much early money on academic talent makes me think they had a shaky technology to begin with…