US$35.6 billion per year (wow!) worth was the estimate of sea reef tourism recently (Spalding et al., 2017; SCUBA equipment share btw was US$3.7 billion the same year according to Allied Market Research).
Money making "Blue Ocean Strategy" was described in a 2004 Book by two researchers from Insead Dr. Kim and Dr. Mauborgne. Their idea is to create => a new empty market => instead of competing.
Jacques-Yves Cousteau and Emile Gagnant did just that => in the diving gear industry (copper hat vs. Scuba), => in turn Scuba opened diving to the public and attracted tourists, thus the 35.6B .. (continued below ↴ )
The two inventors took a well known 70 years old technology from the mining industry and adapted it to diving. While manufacturers of professional diving gear were busy fighting each other for the professional market, the two Frenchmen driven mostly by curiosity and openness of the mind, looked around, and created a new market of recreational and "autonomous" diving without any umbilical. Their new portable Scuba was indeed handy when heavy copper hat equipment reached limitations. Such new markets were highly profitable. Thus an existing for 70 year technology was easily adapted to the newly created demand, and competition was as usual in such cases, too busy fighting thus too late to catch up
(Reviewing Jacques Cousteau Scuba against the major business errors listed by professors W. Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne)
error: making existing users happier
Although Cousteau and Gagnant built an "autonomous diving suit" targeting their personal needs for reef diving and discovery and pleasure, they never had in mind those professional old copper hat divers (neither murky ports or rivers).
error: filling a niche in existing markets
Only later in time the Scuba was fitted with an umbilical from the classic dive suit scheme with the compressor on the surface, for pro divers. Initially no existing gear niche was aimed (as those a filled with existing competition).
error: confusing new technology innovation with new market creation
Scuba was invented in 1860 and when Cousteau took over in 1943 the technology was not new. But the markets for Scuba were new alright.
error: equating creative destruction of competitors and new markets
Scuba at the beginning was not disturbing nor aiming copper hat manufacturers.
error: equating market creation with diversification
No new use of improved old copper hats were introduced neither considered by Cousteau.
error: equating market creation with downgrading of main old tech
No low cost versions of copper hats were introduced neither considered by Cousteau.
What if Cousteau would have applied them to his Scuba invention? There are several tools listed in the original book. Let us review Scuba from this toolbox prospective.
Look across industries. Cousteau found solutions at a liquid oxygen manufacturer and inside a car adapted for war restrictions on fuels, not inside the old industry of diving suits. Was he also inspired by the old patented breathing apparatus from the mining industry described by Jules Verne, we are not sure.
Look across strategic groups inside one industry. Cousteau was surely aware of the heavy diving suits, but he also liked the rubber flippers and a mask used by the Navy for covert operations and later by spear-fishers. The first solution allows underwater breathing, wile the latter gives amazing freedom of movement.
Look across a chain of buyers. Clearly a copper helmet suit was operated at least by two people (a professional diver and a pump operator), while a Scuba could be purchased and used by a recreational diver alone (at least in those days safety standards).
Look across functional or emotional appeals. Old diving suits has little glamour and was mostly about getting the work done underwater. Scuba on the contrary was a lot about discovering the stunning beauty of the ocean.
Look across time. The WWII has disrupted much of the old cozy complacency in industries. Incremental changes of the old diving suit were under threat of a technological shift.
4 actions on existing industry standards: eliminate; reduce; raise; create. Cousteau imagined these actions having his own interests in mind: extend dives over breath-holds, and get rid of heavy cumbersome equipment. Actions are easier to imagine while having one's or user's interest in mind (not just technology for the pleasure of inventing stuff).
Scuba vs. Copper Helmet: Eliminate expensive heavy dry suit along with copper helmet and the air-supply umbilical; Reduce the protection offered by the dry suit; Raise ease of movements and portability; Create freedom for open water or wreck confinement;
Scuba vs. freedive: Eliminate urge to breathe; Reduce diver's mobility; Raise bottom time; Create underwater breathing;
Reaching beyond existing demand. Though not being real businessmen, the Scuba inventors did use leverage to capitalize on underwater movie-making, thus going beyond diving gear industry. Others followed into teaching Scuba ("soon-to-be-noncustomers"), and further into underwater resorts ("unexplored noncustomers").
From several business standpoints Scuba appeared viable. Underwater movies made it appealing, the price was affordable, the manufacturing costs were profitable, and user benefits were really driving it beyond any transient hype. For more on user benefits please see the six stages of buyer experience cycle in the original book. Scuba is a great product in terms of image, fun, usability, risk, as well as during different stages of ownership from first rental experience thru ease of purchase and learning. Later developments of the neoprene wetsuit and buoyancy compensator improved the usability further.
Reallocating money into the key spots. Cousteau played on synergies of his relatively meager resources spread between marine biology expeditions, oil geological investigation, film-making, etc. He also saved money thru employing trusted enthusiasts eager to go well beyond their duties.
Implementing the invented Scuba. Cousteau and Gagnant didn't proselytize any manufacturer of old diving gear into adopting Scuba. Usually old-timers bogged in competition prefer to go bust rather than embrace changes. Just look at Excite CEO refusal to purchase Google for US$0.7 M .. It seems that occupational class of combative business people have such an emotional egotistic attraction to fight their "personal foes", that they are unable to look into non-competitive strategies. Yet an open-minded and compassionate class can? (M.Gerlach et al., 4 personalities, 2018; M.Hansen, 5000 top performers)