Is Being First to Market All It's Cracked Up to Be?

Being first to market with a novel product design that meets an unmet need is the holy grail of the medical device industry. But should it be?

While at BIOMEDevice San Jose last week, I attended a conference presentation by Ivan Vesely, founder and CSO at ValveXchange Inc. (Aurora, CO). Vesely gave an interesting presentation about the company's two-piece, exchangeable, bioprosthetic tissue valve system. The company claims that this product eliminates the need for open-heart surgery and overcomes safety and longevity drawbacks associated with traditional transcatheter approaches.

However, what I found so refreshing about Vesely's presentation was his frank discussion of the mistakes that he and his team made during the admittedly too-long 10-year development process along with the various successes. Because of various setbacks, the product likely will obtain PMA approval and get to market in about three years, according to Vesely. The Sapien transcatheter valve from Edwards Lifesciences, on the other hand, will be first to market in the United States, though Vesely notes that the technologies and target patients differ in some respects.

And though ValveXchange's product won't be leading the way, Vesely isn't too worried. "There's a danger in being first. There's a thing called a first-mover disadvantage, and very often products that are first to market don't succeed," he says. "There's something that experts refer to as the 'free-rider effect.' Those companies that are second or third to market take advantage of market development by leaders. The first wave educates the customers and the second wave simply gets the customer base. We now have the ability to correct the early technical deficiencies of transcatheter valves. The first mouse gets the trap; the second mouse gets the cheese."

He has some interesting points. Perhaps being first isn't everything; maybe there's some validity to that childhood chant that goes: First is the worst; second is the best. However, the pressure is on, then, for these free riders to produce a better product than that of the market pioneer. If your products can't be first to market, you better be darn sure that your product is the best on the market. Essentially, it all comes back to good design and incremental improvements.

What do you think, readers? Is being first to market the most important thing? Or do you agree with Vesely? Let me know in the comments section. --Shana Leonard