Yes Kevin, and sometimes its a mixed bag. The Feds fought AT&T's attempt to buy T-Mobile because it would reduce the number of carriers in the mobile phone market. But it looked like AT&T was buying airwave frequencies rather than marketshare. The Feds didn't see it that way. So, in a rare move they blocked the acquisition.
Sadly, it is typically BAD for the customer when a company makes a lot of acquisitions. This is more even more true if they are mainly aimed at grabbing customers from the acquired companies, vs. aquiring better technology. The reason is that the company becomes more of a monopoly, increases prices, and there is less competition and less diversity in the marketplace.
In addition to the materials and other resources and improved reach, something to consider here is the different types of business that these companies pursue. Low-end desktop printers are one thing, and engineering prototypes are another, especially the fit and form but not function type of model. But high-end laser sintering for small volumes in aircraft and automotive use is quite another and draws different customers.
While 3D systems inc. essentially invented the SLA, and has been the pioneer in the rapid prototyping arena, I did not realize Z-corp was a major player.I would have put Objet as a solid number 2, even postured to overtake 3D system due to their superior resolution alone. Those 2, (3D & Objet) are by far the best I’ve used. Thinking back, I don’t think I’ve EVER used a Z-corp printer.It sure will be interesting to see if the new merger places them solidly in the market in front of Objet for good.
With that many acquistions, I would guess some of the deals were made to grab marketshare and new customers. In those cases, the deal could be a big gain for the customer that now has a more robust entity as their 3D printer vendor.
Aside from more R&D dollars, better reseller channels, and stronger alliances with software vendors, I suspect the consolidations can also give vendors access to what's become a very wide range of available materials for the somewhat less wide range of available processes. So acquiring key technologies--manufacturing processes and materials--seems like it would also be a main driver.
@TJ: I totally agree that consolidation at this rate can be alarming, especially to companies having coughed up big bucks for printers. But most of those acquisitions weren't on the scale of this most recent Z Corp purchase. They were much smaller--many more about picking up key technologies rather than adding new models to a printer line. And truthfully, to date, there has been little overlap between any of the product lines of all the acquired companies.
That said, you never know what changes an acquisition can bring, so I guess only time will tell.
23 acquisitions in 2 years? Boy oh boy, those early adopters who saw their technical support consumed in this manner must have been rather nervous. To have your careful research be bought out, and the model you pick dropped in product-line consolidation would be disappointing to say the least.
A company may be trying to grow itself to the next level, but that rate is bound to alienate customers.
I don't think we're at the commodization stage yet. I think there is tons of interest and the technologies are really coming together, but to take it to the next step, these companies need more R&D dollars, better reseller channels, and stronger alliances with software vendors like the CAD guys. That's what this particular acquisition is all about. To your point, Alex, the acquisition expands their market sectors, grows their reseller channels, and broadens their product line with new capabilities, particularly around color.
Engineers at Fuel Cell Energy have found a way to take advantage of a side reaction, unique to their carbonate fuel cell that has nothing to do with energy production, as a potential, cost-effective solution to capturing carbon from fossil fuel power plants.
To get to a trillion sensors in the IoT that we all look forward to, there are many challenges to commercialization that still remain, including interoperability, the lack of standards, and the issue of security, to name a few.
This is part one of an article discussing the University of Washington’s nationally ranked FSAE electric car (eCar) and combustible car (cCar). Stay tuned for part two, tomorrow, which will discuss the four unique PCBs used in both the eCar and cCars.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.