I love how the federal government is using crowd-sourcing to innovate and solve their unique issues. I think it can work well in this setting where finding solutions helps the overall business and does not happen at the expense of someone. For instance, as a contrasting example, I heard that at NASA one of their big concerns was that by crowd-sourcing, their scientists might get bypassed on the glory of finding a solution — ultimately affecting morale (especially if someone has been working on a problem for many years).
Sephora is definitely at the forefront of beauty retailers. They create an incredible shopping experience which is why I’m such a loyal shopper. Personalized product recommendations are extremely helpful — in the beauty space, it is hard to figure out which new products to try because there are so many brands, it’s hard to understand which products are right for your skin type/color, and reviews online are often contradictory. I really like the idea of using data to power this especially since these recommendations do not feel too sales-y.
I had no idea high-end fashion houses had been partnering with Vojd. Great article and thanks for sharing!
To answer your first question, I currently do not think of additive manufacturing as being luxurious/high-end since it is machine made and automated. From what I have seen, most items created this way are very modern in style (e.g., the ring example). While this fits with Akris’ aesthetic, I’d be interested in seeing what they produced with more traditional brands like Louis Vuitton and Dior. On the other hand, I do really like the idea that using additive manufacturing is a more sustainable option — so that aspect positively affects my decision to purchase something made from additive manufacturing.
It’s interesting to hear how their longer term goal is to license manufacturing programs to these fashion houses. I’d be interested in hearing how easy it is to learn how to design on these programs and how designers at these storied houses feel about having to learn something new / taking on a new designer to use this tech. My impression is that designers at high-end fashion houses and couturiers use traditional methods.
Fascinating! You couldn’t have described Amazon’s innovation better: “removing traditional retail’s most pervasive bottleneck: the checkout line”. There have been many times when I decide not to buy something in store because the lines are too long (e.g., Sephora, Whole Foods; I’d love to see this applied in Whole Foods).
I truly believe stores of the future depend on knowing each of your customers to serve them better. When I was working at Everlane, we tested having each person sign in upon entering — so that our sales team could better serve them, recommend sizes/styles, etc based off of their online accounts. It ended up being too time consuming and inconvenient so we scratched the test. So tech like Amazon’s is game changing, especially since they know each customer’s purchase habits across many categories.
I really like how you begin by comparing and contrasting three different manufacturing methods. I agree that with 3D printing, Nike can reduce shipping/duties and inventory carrying costs by being able to manufacture shoes closer to the end point of sale. I think another benefit is that there is a lot less waste in terms of materials such as fabrics when 3D printing. In our marketing case we learned that Nike wants to focus on sustainability — and from my point of view, 3D printing can be a selling point for all the reasons you listed above.
Awesome article! I had heard how prohibitively expensive 3D printing can be, so it is interesting to learn that Adidas believes they can be profitable when they hit 100K pairs of shoes. It sounds like this technology will set them well up for on demand customization (both in terms of style and fit) — which reminds me of how you can customize shoes on Adidas’ site which I know has been very popular.
I also wonder what this means for counterfeits. With 3D printing it seems like it would be much easier to create exact replicas (assuming the 3D machine isn’t prohibitively expensive).
Very thoughtful! My father had a kidney transplant last year so this definitely resonates with me. His kidney transplant was from someone who was in a fatal car crash which backs up your point that suitable donors may decline as cars become safer. This innovation would solve the demand/supply issue as well as help schedule kidney transplants (right now if you are on the list waiting for a donor, you have to be on call and come in at a moment’s notice).
It sounds like Cellink will be able to make viable organs 10+ years out. With so much uncertainty around it, I wonder whether this company will be able to effectively compete with large pharmaceutical companies, especially if they decide to participate in this space. I like your idea around having Cellink partner with companies already in this space.