editorial = sharp research for 30 years to bring their lcd tvs to market, but the market changes so fast now that its hard to recover all that research.
writer's implication = poor sharp
real implication = sharp spent too long getting this technology to market, and/or struggled too long in making it affordable (since they aren't especially affordable now).
the editorial's author is a hoser who thinks the industries should not have to deal with a change in the competitive global landscape. The market will ultimately determine for itself how much time and money can be spent on research without destroying the prospect of an actual profitable product in the end. I'm not one for free markets. I still think that complaining that industries with failing business models are the victims of free markets is gay (in the pejorative, grade-school sense).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment