Downsouth,
RE: " Show me the simple math. Give me an example. Prove to me that a company is in a better position if it has 10% of a rapidly growing market than if it has 90% of a rapidly growing market. Include risk versus reward for investors, profitability, and strategic considerations."
Note that I said 'theorectically'. This doesn't include mindshare effects that often include the phrase, 'the de facto standard'(that I get so sick of hearing). Obviously, if a company has 100% market share, then it can only grow at the growth of the market, the less it has the more 'potential' that it has to grow in terms of revenues, earnings and margins. You can't take business from yourself, now can you. That was my only point.
RE:"A company does NOT achieve 90% marketshare based on high price and arrogancy. You might want to find some folks if the FC business with a bit more insight and less bias."
BRCD NEVER had much less than 90% of the market. This is a disruptive technology that BRCD had all by itself for about the first six months that they were shipping. You would agree, would you not, that the higher the market share a company has, the more pricing power it has and the less it has to worry about customer service. Even in the GG book, it says that once a product enters the tornado, then customer orientation takes a back seat to operational excellence. Obviously BRCD feels that they've entered the tornado(or they haven't read the book). What's so hard about that?
The source of that observation came from an integrator who works with many OEMs, most of whom sell BRCD switches.
Craig |
