RolStoppable said:
Bottom up disruption is best defined as starting with a crappy product for crappy customers which gives the entrant into the market (or disruptor if it's an established company) kind of an immunity, because the incumbents don't see profits or worthy profit margins in that segment, so they don't view the entrant/disruptor as a threat to their business. The entrant/disruptor refines their products over time and eventually starts to eat into the marketshare of higher quality products, all the while having higher profit margins than the incumbents. This makes the disruptor more competitive and the incumbents will retreat from these lower segments, because the profits to be made cease to be worth it for them. So in the case of a top down disruption, the ultimate goal has to be to transform your product into a crappy one for crappy customers. Right? Given the PSV's price of the hardware and also the 3DS's, Sony has a long way to go. But more specifically, the crappiest customer in the mobile gaming market today would be the person who buys a phone and then $1 games, because they happen to own a device that can play games. Like you noted, the PSV isn't a phone, so Sony can already forget about such a strategy. But Sony could make the PSV a phone, right? Theoretically yes, but in praxis it's not going to work, because of size issues. A device with a d-pad, buttons and sticks cannot be, no matter what you do, shrunk to a comparable size of today's smartphones, thus it is unappealing to the crappy customer who would only game as an afterthought. The PSV is neither equipped nor can it be retooled to be a disruptive product. |
You know I do agree on your points, which is why I said a phone version would have to come out.
I would expect a phone version to look differently.
Which is also why I wrote this thread, to point out that Sony could be in trouble with this portable.
