The same problem plagues all of these models: they're hierarchical and top-heavy. Having worked at traditional companies and having considered a career in academia; there's a reason these organizations get outboxed.
Innovation requires risk and investment. How are any of these three an effective model of risk? Big companies will invest without taking risk, research organizations and academia will take risks without investing, and branches of government and political entities (in the U.S.) are famously bad at both (ex: healthcare.gov).
> The fact that Silicon Valley is boxing all of these things out of the market doesn’t prove they won’t exist. They did before anticompetitive behavior became the business model du jour
Blame anticompetitive behavior all you want, but there are widely-known systemic issues with all of these alternative structures that makes them ineffective.
> and will again
Only if you create a walled garden where they are the only competitor. Obviously the current internet model favors VCs because R+D is cheap and quick. For rocketry, semiconductors, etc. (i.e., fields which require large upfront capital investment) these alternative investment models fare better.