I don't think he's necessarily referring to the very first start up a particular space. Everything he's saying is basically true, if you think of "first-mover" as the first company to dominate, which usually tends to happen within the first 1 to 2 years of when a particular product/idea becomes feasible.
The point of the article is not "first mover". The point is that opportunities get taken and gobbled up as soon as they are feasible. And once those opportunities are devoured and a company has a 3 year lead, it's nearly impossible for new companies to come in, unless they have a significant differentiation.
First to dominate is rarely the first to start. Also the dominance can be fleeting instead of permanent. E.g. MySpace was pretty dominant circa 2006-07, not so much now.
I don't think he's necessarily referring to the very first start up a particular space. Everything he's saying is basically true, if you think of "first-mover" as the first company to dominate, which usually tends to happen within the first 1 to 2 years of when a particular product/idea becomes feasible.
The point of the article is not "first mover". The point is that opportunities get taken and gobbled up as soon as they are feasible. And once those opportunities are devoured and a company has a 3 year lead, it's nearly impossible for new companies to come in, unless they have a significant differentiation.