I agree, there is nothing bad with copying. It is inevitable that some aspects of one business are copied others. If people didn't do copies we would have single bakery in town. Still plain copying is not enough. Not only because local conditions are different and not because differentiation amongst competitors is important but also because straightforward copying of ideas doesn't ignite and inspire people. How can one run a startup if they are not excited about their idea? The keyword here is 'their'. I doubt it is possible to become attached to a copy of an idea, model, or implementation. How can one find energy to overcome hurdles of running a startup without personal attachment to the business? Impossible. Hence innovation on top of a copy is vital from this perspective too.
There is a problem with copying though. You can't copy those aspects of a business you have personal interest in. Say if one is a technology oriented person then he won't be willing, or I'd even say, capable of copying a technical solution of somebody else. Too boring. Boredom kills everything. But what would you do if you had a brilliant idea (any idea is brilliant if it is your own, right?), and you went into efforts implementing it and all was going great until one day when you found another implementation of your idea. That very idea you totally fell in love with? As soon as you consider it's a copy you are done, your love is gone. Do we still need more than one bakery in our global Town of Internet? What would you do? Cheers. On Sep 4, 10:48 pm, "Michael Harries" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Australia needs more 'big' innovation - totally agree, and (as per BigM and > others) this doesn't require a new ideas. Look at Facebook, YouTube and any > number of others - in all of these cases, it's about taking existing ideas - > but at the right time - and tying into a viable business model. (There are a > billion great ideas out there, finding the ones with potential for today's > market (and your team) is the challenge. > > My view - success needs invention or ideas that the market is poised to > understand, to accept, and (ideally) to go exponential on. Innovation > includes the following: > > 1. Identifying the right ideas for todays market, > 2. Developing the ideas to suit todays market > 3. Reframing the problem (changing market perception) to bring the > technology to and beyond the brink of market acceptance > 4. Finding ways to turn the opportunity from potential into reality > (early adopters, etc, etc) > > Some of this is about insight, some about engineering or technology, and > some about 'black belt' marketing. > > Finally, I have no issue with locally focused versions of international > successes. The more success Australia has with home grown, locally focused > ventures, the more we'll develop the culture for the big plays. > > Cheers, > Michael > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelharries > > I like to think about innovation as invention around not just hte > technology, but also demand, how ready the market is to play, accessability > of the idea, etc. > > > > On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 10:06 PM, BigM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Completely agree here on he invention v innovation theme. While it's > > true we really need a big success to put Australia on the map, the > > example used of google is a very pertinent one to the discussion... we > > all know google was far from the first search engine, but now look at > > their domination! Murdoch paid what, close to $1bn for Myspace, only > > to watch Facebook constantly gobble up it's market dominance... > > > It seems to me there is a very common pattern of someone being 'first > > to market' to actually create the market itself, then someone else > > steps in, with the hindsight of what that first player has done well > > and not so well, and manages to capture market share with a better > > mousetrap.... I would also imagine that if you pitch for capital for > > an innovation on something that has already been proven a success, you > > are more likely to get some interest in it, which increases the > > resources at your disposal, and so in theory would increase your > > chance of success.... > > > On Sep 4, 7:47 pm, Chris Hitchen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Elias, you've put it much more succinctly than I could: it's about > > > innovation versus invention more than innovation versus copying ... > > > the copying bit only applies to the original model, but as pointed out > > > earlier, innovation is critical thereafter. > > > > @ Geoff and Chris S - there are local investors wanting to talk to > > > innovators! Perhaps we need a separate thread for a list of 'wants' > > > and 'haves'?! > > > > On Sep 4, 7:07 pm, "Elias Bizannes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Chris Hitchen: Awesome. I hold that exact same view, and actually, have > > a > > > > saying that explains it. The guy that created the wheel was an > > inventor; the > > > > guy that added the other three was an innovator. I can also recall one > > of > > > > the big names in history in American industry (edison?) that said > > innovation > > > > is much more important. > > > > > On 9/4/08, Chris Saad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Agreed Geoff, > > > > > > I often find a lack of vision, or a lack of understanding or a lack > > of risk > > > > > taking (particularly from investors) when it comes to Australian > > ventures. > > > > > > We need to encourage, reward and support Entrepreneurs and Investors > > who > > > > > study the global market and build word class products or provide > > world class > > > > > funding. > > > > > > As discussed in other threads. We need a Google, Youtube and Facebook > > style > > > > > success story to feed the local ecosystem > > > > > > Realestate.com.au <http://realestate.com.au/> is not that. > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 8:21 PM, Geoff McQueen < > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >> Chris, > > > > > >> Not to take away anything from the success stories you correctly > > point > > > > >> out, I think in a market the size of Australia's (read: small), we > > should be > > > > >> focusing on companies doing world class things, things we can export > > to > > > > >> other parts of the world where the markets (either individually or > > in > > > > >> aggregate) dwarf our own. > > > > > >> Apologise that this is off the topic of Innovate or Copy you've > > started, > > > > >> but in my opinion, the emphasis or at least extra brownie points > > should > > > > >> really be on entrepreneurs and companies working to deliver > > solutions which > > > > >> stand on their own on the global stage. > > > > > >> What does everyone else think? > > > > > >> Geoff > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > > > >> From: [email protected] [mailto: > > > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris > > Hitchen > > > > >> Sent: Thursday, 4 September 2008 12:39 PM > > > > >> To: Silicon Beach Australia > > > > >> Subject: [SiliconBeach] Innovate or copy? > > > > > >> This post was prompted by a comment Liz Turner of Engenuity made on > > > > >> this forum about wanting to meet groundbreaking entrepreneurs. Far > > > > >> from disagreeing with Liz about the value such people provide, it > > just > > > > >> got me thinking about true innovation versus commercial mimicry. > > > > > >> As I said to Liz, I want to highlight the contribution made by > > > > >> businesses "copying" existing models and challenge the notion that > > > > >> it's only innovators that benefit our industry and have broader > > things > > > > >> to offer (even if that's not what you were saying Liz!). > > > > > >> I marvel at the true innovators, but they are few and far between > > and > > > > >> both the Australian economy and our start-up sector can benefit from > > a > > > > >> bit of me-tooism in private enterprise. In fact, none of our best > > > > >> (read: most profitable) internet businesses were original ideas; > > Seek, > > > > >> Realestate.com.au <http://realestate.com.au/>, Carsguide and Wotif > > are > > > > >> all tried and tested models > > > > >> from other markets. > > > > > >> How many true Australian innovators in the digital space are making > > > > >> significant money and/or operating sustainable businesses? Perhaps > > > > >> half a dozen? (I'm hoping we can list more than that ...). There are > > > > >> lots of examples in addition to the ones listed above of relatively > > > > >> simple business models being taken from other markets and applied > > > > >> locally. The private equity / tech. investment company netus (which > > > > >> evolved out of eCorp who were responsible for bringing Ticketek, > > > > >> ninemsn and Ebay to Australia) has built a business doing just this. > > > > > >> Remember too that innovation needs to be funded and many > > entrepreneurs > > > > >> first seek a cash cow that can fund their ongoing R&D, > > experimentation > > > > >> and business incubation. Stateless Systems in Melbourne are a great > > > > >> example with retailmenot.com providing the building blocks for some > > > > >> great innovation with new apps like Cushy CMS. > > > > > >> Innovation can also happen within a proven business model too; in > > fact > > > > >> in our space it usually has to because the Australian market is > > unique > > > > >> and if we stop innovating in the digital world we will quickly > > become > > > > >> irrelevant. Business models need to constantly adapt and processes > > and > > > > >> products need to be re-engineered and improved. Some of Australia's > > > > >> best and brightest are running businesses that did not innovate in > > > > >> terms of the original model, but are absolutely innovating now. > > > > > >> Anyway, the point being that innovators are vital, but there is a > > lot > > > > >> to be said for "copying"! There is a world of difference between > > > > >> plagiarism and imitation which, as we all know, is the sincerest > > form > > > > >> of flattery! As long as you're not infringing a patent, go for it. > > > > > >> What do you think? > > > > > > -- > > > > > Chris Saad > > > > > > FaradayMedia - For Audiences of One > > > > > Particls - Are You Paying Attention? > > > > > Engagd - The Open Attention Platform > > > > > Media 2.0 Workgroup - Social, Democratic, Distributed > > > > > APML - Your Attention Profile > > > > > DataPortability - Connect, Control, Share, Remix > > > > > -- > > > > Elias Bizanneshttp://liako.biz > > -- > __ > Michael Harries --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Silicon Beach Australia" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
