GLP-1 agonists (such as Novo's Ozempic) are another example in healthcare. Despite their effectiveness, Pfizer rejected GLP-1s in the 1990s because they would eat into their other product lines. It took over a decade before another company, Novo, commercialized them.
Pretty sure this happens all the time those days. Big corps being happy with status quo, and not doing X until a small motivated competitor does.
Novo Nordisk is the highest valued company in Europe, employs about 65k people, and has $35 billion revenue. It's not exactly what I call a "small" competitor – it's basically part of "big pharma".
More importantly, "Pfizer rejected GLP-1s in the 1990s because they would eat into their other product lines" is not an accurate reflection of the article it links. If you read the (rather lengthy) article then it seems more corporate politics, tunnel vision, and a small startup not being able to "sell a story" on this to investors such as Pfizer.
Having read the entire article, I fail to see how anyone can come away with that conclusion.
Comments
Pretty sure this happens all the time those days. Big corps being happy with status quo, and not doing X until a small motivated competitor does.
Novo Nordisk is the highest valued company in Europe, employs about 65k people, and has $35 billion revenue. It's not exactly what I call a "small" competitor – it's basically part of "big pharma".
More importantly, "Pfizer rejected GLP-1s in the 1990s because they would eat into their other product lines" is not an accurate reflection of the article it links. If you read the (rather lengthy) article then it seems more corporate politics, tunnel vision, and a small startup not being able to "sell a story" on this to investors such as Pfizer.
Having read the entire article, I fail to see how anyone can come away with that conclusion.
Kodak and Xerox both come to mind, front and center.
RCA with FM radio, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Howard_Armstrong