I neglected to mention one other thing that would make a new fig competitive with Genesis: 

A sane set of restrictions governing 3D printing. 

DAZ3D's EULA has a blanket prohibition on 3D printing which on the surface smells like fear that a laser scan of a 3D print could reverse engineer their meshes, but is far more likely a cover for the actual reason: royalties. If you make a popular character for one of their figures and then make renders of her, your sale potential is relatively small and the resulting work can easily be pirated diminishing your profits. Moreover Poser already set the standard that a 2D rendering application's output is royalty free and DAZ has gamely gone along with that.

If you 3D print a posed master of that popular character for mass reproduction aimed at the anime fig collector market, you stand to make serious profits, the physical good has to be intentionally counterfeited to cut into those profits, and DAZ won't see a dime of your money or the counterfeiters' based on their sculpts/rigs.

By making the argument that it's about protecting their IP from reverse engineering rather than opening the can of worms that is royalties, DAZ can stand behind the DMCA and say "how is this not legitimate?" It's almost better than they're not honest about the matter.

Going forward, a new figure not from DAZ needs to address this. I honestly think that if you mass produce a commercial physical good from a mesh, it's reasonable for you and the mesh owner to negotiate royalties. I also think the royalties should be reasonable and affordable and not a hidden disincentive. There's enough money to go around and being indignant that someone had a more profitable idea for using your product than you thought of is stupid. 

The VST industry is a perfect example of people being asinine about this instead of fair, but their market is a lot more docile than 3D modeling ever will be.