Which is orthogonal to what I'm responding to, which was that:

"First to market is the winner even with an inferior product. See whatsapp and telegram"

My point is that this not true, and that "first to market" usually losses.

If anything, what you suggest, reinforces it even more, since it implies that not only "first to market" often loses to a superior product, but even to players an inferior one.

I worded that inarticulately. Some of those first movers were absolute trash, though I agree that later and more commercially successful products are not always better.