This is a very weak essay. Here's the conclusion, or "Kontra's law":
> A commercial company’s ability to innovate is inversely proportional to its proclivity to publicly release conceptual products.
This is nonsense since conceptual products are innovative by definition.
What the author maybe is trying to say is that working on concept products isn't a good idea in the business sense. But the examples he gives are all companies that have been wildly successful: GM, Microsoft and Nokia. While those companies' performance declined, there might be dozens of different reasons for that.
> A commercial company’s ability to innovate is inversely proportional to its proclivity to publicly release conceptual products.
This is nonsense since conceptual products are innovative by definition.
What the author maybe is trying to say is that working on concept products isn't a good idea in the business sense. But the examples he gives are all companies that have been wildly successful: GM, Microsoft and Nokia. While those companies' performance declined, there might be dozens of different reasons for that.