When talking about The Walt Disney Company, most people will immediately think of their iconic characters and popular movies. Meanwhile, probably nobody expects them to come up with new technologies and innovative specifications for the tech industry. However, these thoughts turned out to be deluding. Even though founded in 1923 and focusing on the entertainment industry, Walt Disney has actually always been an innovative company when it comes to new technologies: such as with their animated movies (Walt Disney, 2017). Now once again, this perception has been surpassed by recent news of the company’s internal developments of a new blockchain platform: Dragonchain.

Back in 2014, Disney started with an internal project to develop a secure asset management system. However, they decided to drop the project in 2016 to turn it into open source. Just as the technology behind cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum, Dragonchain is a digital ledger based on algorithms that documents all transactions being made. Since every blockchain contains a complete history of all transactions, it is very difficult to modify these and commit fraud. Without going too much into detail considering the techniques itself, it is commonly believed that blockchain will become an entirely new infrastructural layer of the internet. A practical application of this technology will be by completely replacing intermediaries in traditional payment systems, such as in the financial or real estate industry (Peterson, 2017).

Despite its disruptive potential, a lot of especially less tech-savvy companies, find it hard to understand the practical implications of blockchain. This is where Dragonchain comes in. Since it is available for open source, it is easier for companies to build what they want on top of the Dragonchain blockchain, without making high investments. On top of that, Dragonchain is designed to be even more private than Ethereum. This because it is a hybrid, meaning that some information is private, and some is public. Having some of the data public is crucial to make the technology watertight against potential fraud. This because the data of each transaction has to be spread across a decentralized network to authenticate its validity (Ghosh et al., 2016). However, with existing public technologies it is very costly and time-consuming to realize such levels of security. With Dragonchain the encryption is built in, which is why it does not require companies to leave sensitive data open to network, or to hire expensive engineers to build it for them (Peterson, 2017).

Although promising, Dragonchain still needs a lot of funding to realize its ambition to be easily accessible on the commercial market. The first implementations are highly successful, but with their recent ICO (Initial Coin Offer) they expect to raise extra funds in order to be even more open to the rest of the world (PR Newswire, 2017).

Ghosh, R., Haider, K., & Kim, P. (2016). Bitcoin or Ethereum? The Million Dollar Question. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Carey Business School.

Peterson, B. (2017, October 1). Disney built a blockchain, and now its creators are trying to turn it into a commercial platform to compete with Ethereum. Opgehaald van Business Insider : https://www.businessinsider.nl/disney-blockchain-creators-build-commercial-platform-on-dragonchain-with-ico-2017-9/?international=true&r=US

PR Newswire. (2017, October 2). Dragonchain™, Originally Developed at Disney, Opens Limited Supply Initial Coin Offering (ICO). Opgehaald van PR Newswire: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/dragonchain-originally-developed-at-disney-opens-limited-supply-initial-coin-offering-ico-300529074.html

Walt Disney . (2017). Technology innovations. Walt Disney Animation Studios: https://www.disneyanimation.com/technology/innovations

In line with the recent comments of Porsche chairman, Uwe Hück, it is interesting to reflect on the statements he made. In his interview with Business Insider he abominates the Tesla business model and criticizes their way of working. According to him, Tesla’s approach is “immoral”, which is according to him why “they can never be an example to the automotive industry” (Verhelst, 2017). However, it does not mean that Porsche does not have any electrical aspirations. He strongly advocates for electrical driving, but hates the “real” agenda of Tesla’s business. Because it is not just selling cars that makes Tesla competitive, it is their ideology to change the way we drive our cars. (Troagott, 2017)

Back in the days, while everyone was arguing about electrical cars, nobody really made the first move to change. However, a few companies did invest in the design of an electrical car, of which Tesla was the first and most well-known brand that entered the market. This does indeed involve huge investments with external funding, which is why their business model is not as profitable yet. Nowadays, after Tesla’s proven success, conventional car manufacturers changed their strategies and are focusing on the development of fully electrical cars. However, Tesla is one step ahead which is why his statements do make sense. As mentioned, Tesla is not just a car manufacturer, but invests heavily in the development of self-driving cars and has major expertise in the field of software development. With all their cars driving around on the street for years, they are able to collect massive amounts of data which they can use to develop new technologies. Their cars are completely customized to function on their software and to collect relevant data. With this in mind, they actually behave more like a high-tech start-up (DeBord, 2016).

Reflecting on the plans of tech giants Apple and Google to realize autonomous driving, these companies are testing such technologies for years. With all their knowledge and software expertise, it would just be a matter of time before this becomes reality. But one essential part is forgotten: they are not car manufacturers. Making a short link (not only because Elon Musk and Larry Page are close friends) to the automotive industry, Tesla would be the most ideal company to cooperate with (Gibbs, 2015). However, probably not because Google wants to sell cars, they want to sell their technology. As Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirms: “Google has done a great job at showing the potential of autonomous transport, but they’re not a car company” (D’Onfro, 2016).

Going back to the statements of Uwe Hück, he may have a valid point stating that Elon Musk knows that Google or Apple will eventually buy Tesla. However, his comments may also imply that he does not want to see the reality in which we are living, which is where cars are not solely driving on petrol or even electricity anymore, but basically on data.

DeBord, M. (2016, 5, 16). This is why Tesla and Google are the future of cars — and Apple isn’t. Opgehaald van Business Insider: http://nordic.businessinsider.com/this-is-why-tesla-and-google-are-the-future-of-cars-and-apple-isnt-2016-5/
D’Onfro, J. (2016, 6, 2). Tesla CEO Elon Musk: Apple will be a direct competitor — even if it started its car project too late. Opgehaald van Business Insider: http://nordic.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-on-apple-car-2016-6/
Gibbs, S. (2015, 4, 21). Google almost bought Tesla when it had just two weeks of cash left. Opgehaald van The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/apr/21/google-almost-bought-tesla-elon-musk-larry-page
Troagott, J. (2017, 9, 25). The Tesla Model What? Porsche CEO Doesn’t See Tesla As A Rival. Opgehaald van Carbuzz: http://www.carbuzz.com/news/2017/9/25/The-Tesla-Model-What-Porsche-CEO-Doesn-t-See-Tesla-As-A-Rival-7741228/
Verhelst, K. (2017, 9, 22). De herrieschopper van Porsche noemt het verdienmodel van Tesla onhoudbaar en ‘immoreel’. Opgehaald van Business Insider: https://www.businessinsider.nl/de-herrieschopper-van-porsche-noemt-het-verdienmodel-van-tesla-onhoudbaar-en-immoreel/