http://thinkfuture.com/wp/index.php/2010/06/29/applied-vs-theoretical-innovation/ the blog of hellofuture Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:06:23 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://thinkfuture.com/wp/index.php/2010/06/29/applied-vs-theoretical-innovation/comment-page-1/#comment-463 Wanton Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:06:23 +0000 http://thinkfuture.com/wp/?p=2295#comment-463 Its not directly about monetization - there's often a long lead time between invention and moneymaking. Google for example had a tech innovation, page rank, and yet it wasn't that that made them money, it was improving the GoTo.com business model that did that. The other factor you miss, and I think is crucially the issue, is whether the innovation is EFFICIENT. You can easily have a innovation that is EFFICIENT yet doesnt have direct monetization as a result. Again Google's use of commodity PCs massively reduced the costs of serving up results (like a factor of 10), while Page Rank increased human efficiency of searches. End result, a cheap good product - that required little underwriting (thus cheap ads could fund it). Its not directly about monetization – there’s often a long lead time between invention and moneymaking. Google for example had a tech innovation, page rank, and yet it wasn’t that that made them money, it was improving the GoTo.com business model that did that. The other factor you miss, and I think is crucially the issue, is whether the innovation is EFFICIENT. You can easily have a innovation that is EFFICIENT yet doesnt have direct monetization as a result. Again Google’s use of commodity PCs massively reduced the costs of serving up results (like a factor of 10), while Page Rank increased human efficiency of searches. End result, a cheap good product – that required little underwriting (thus cheap ads could fund it).

]]>