"Flips now represent an astonishing 35 percent of the camcorder market. They’re the No. 1 bestselling camcorder on Amazon. They’re still selling fast."
I haven't seen any evidence that it didn't sell -- mostly, it appears to be the victim of entering Cisco's maw.
It's highly unlikely, at least to my mind, that Flip would grow to the point of taking over the world, but it's easy to imagine that it could've kept going for a long time if Cisco hadn't axed it.
It was the Market leader with 35% of the camcorder market.
Anyway, they killed the product in the most expensive way possible. If they wanted to save money they could have just cut the R&D budget, reduced production and quietly sold off their inventory. Instead they waited until a few weeks before introducing the product before killing it.
PS: As to why: They make far more money pretending that video conferencing is difficult. N flip phones + N laptops (which people already have) + wifi = 2, 3, or 4 way videoconferencing on the cheap.
"They make far more money pretending that video conferencing is difficult. N flip phones + N laptops (which people already have) + wifi = 2, 3, or 4 way videoconferencing on the cheap."
You're probably right. Maybe Cisco realized they were in an Innovator's Dilemma situation and they are just trying to delay the disruptive innovation, and its attendant lower margins, by buying the Flip and killing it.
Well if they were mass-market prints that cost a lot of money to make and didn't sell well enough to recoup their losses, I certainly wouldn't complain too much when they were cancelled because they were unaffordable.
tylerhwillis|15 years ago
"Flips now represent an astonishing 35 percent of the camcorder market. They’re the No. 1 bestselling camcorder on Amazon. They’re still selling fast."
jseliger|15 years ago
It's highly unlikely, at least to my mind, that Flip would grow to the point of taking over the world, but it's easy to imagine that it could've kept going for a long time if Cisco hadn't axed it.
Retric|15 years ago
Anyway, they killed the product in the most expensive way possible. If they wanted to save money they could have just cut the R&D budget, reduced production and quietly sold off their inventory. Instead they waited until a few weeks before introducing the product before killing it.
PS: As to why: They make far more money pretending that video conferencing is difficult. N flip phones + N laptops (which people already have) + wifi = 2, 3, or 4 way videoconferencing on the cheap.
dean|15 years ago
You're probably right. Maybe Cisco realized they were in an Innovator's Dilemma situation and they are just trying to delay the disruptive innovation, and its attendant lower margins, by buying the Flip and killing it.
heyitsnick|15 years ago
crystalis|15 years ago
zacharycohn|15 years ago
danudey|15 years ago