Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It's Getting Harder to Tell Banks from Tech Companies

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 264 posts

Re: It's Getting Harder to Tell Banks from Tech Companies

#181

Post by reaperducer »

gumby wrote: post #102
debt wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I say the same about largest media company in the world. It's shocking that people don't know it's Facebook. And in their case not just in the world, but the largest media company in history by a very wide margin. People don't see any connection between William Randolph Hearst and Mark Zuckerberg; Facebook really has the best PR team.

> I say the same about largest media company in the world. Indeed. I was just reading about the local broadcast rules (specifically: Sinclair broadcasting wants to buy Tribune media, and the FCC appears to be saying 'go ahead".) . Some people are concerned that this violates rules against concentration of ownership in broadcast stations. But doesn't Facebook operate in essentially 100% of US markets? Should we even c…

The rule was made because radio waves (broadcast) is a finite resource, and so there are a limited number of players who can compete.

The internet can, theoretically, have an unlimited number of competitors, so it's not regulated the same way.

Re: It's Getting Harder to Tell Banks from Tech Companies

#182

Post by reaperducer »

PeterisP wrote: post #133
shkkmo wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They pay reporters.

Quite many of them don't, many (most?) not-top newspapers re-publish news gathered by others; many (most?) cable companies don't produce any news content themselves but just provide access to a bunch of news channels. Those still are media companies.

> many (most?) not-top newspapers re-publish news gathered by others

If you're referring to AP and other news services, they pay quite a lot for that, so the reporters are paid. Also, they contribute their own stories from their paid reporters to the service for other members to share.

Re: It's Getting Harder to Tell Banks from Tech Companies

#183

Post by anonu »

I think the headline should be "It's Getting Harder to Tell Goldman Sachs from Tech Companies"...

Insinuating that all banks are becoming tech companies is being a bit too generous.

EDIT: I am pretty sure Bloomberg does A/B testing on their headlines to see which get more clicks. The URL of the article indicates that the headline may have been different to start out with. I've also often observed the same article on the web and the Bloomberg Terminal with different headlines.

Re: It's Getting Harder to Tell Banks from Tech Companies

#184

Post by barrkel »

wan23 wrote: post #168
babaganoosh89 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably a VP of engineering

Probably not - you'd be surprised how low the the title of "Vice President" is in finance companies.

VP of Engineering isn't as devalued as VP of Sales even in companies where a couple of years of experience gets you VP. Subject matters.

Re: It's Getting Harder to Tell Banks from Tech Companies

#185

Post by freeone3000 »

tomc1985 wrote: post #137
friday99 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those "other revenues" only account for about 13% of Google's revenue. So its a fair comparison. Google is almost 90% an advertising company. https://abc.xyz/investor/pdf/2017Q4_alphabet_earnings_releas...

Yes because all those apps exist... to funnel people towards Google's extensive advertising network, so the money shows up as adbiz revenue instead of with products.

So, by pursuing other technological innovations, they are able to expand their advertising business?

Re: It's Getting Harder to Tell Banks from Tech Companies

#186

Post by arenaninja »

shreyanshd wrote: post #98
organsnyder wrote: post #9

I work for a large healthcare system, and the "we're not a tech company" line is often heard. At many levels, I agree—we're in the business of delivering healthy outcomes to our communities, so we need to make sure that efforts across the enterprise support that—but it is often applied in ways that stifle us from delivering what we feel would be the most impactful and cost-effective solutions. I like to respond that…

I work in technology for an investment bank and i hear “we are not a technology company” every quarter. Ironically, the tech we develop is a major factor, if not the only factor, for revenue. My motivation is instantly shattered when i hear that.

Also work in tech for an investment bank but I hear that we are a tech company every quarter. And it's pure BS, no one here cares about development experience :)

Re: It's Getting Harder to Tell Banks from Tech Companies

#187

Post by sidlls »

samstave wrote: post #151
organsnyder wrote: post #9

I work for a large healthcare system, and the "we're not a tech company" line is often heard. At many levels, I agree—we're in the business of delivering healthy outcomes to our communities, so we need to make sure that efforts across the enterprise support that—but it is often applied in ways that stifle us from delivering what we feel would be the most impactful and cost-effective solutions. I like to respond that…

> "I like to respond that Netflix isn't a tech company, either—they're in the business of delivering entertainment." knowing multiple people from netflix; this is literally a very-uninformed comment... Much of what you even KNOW about cloud-computing, spot markets, streaming, CDNs, etc was pioneered by netflix. They are secretive, but innovative as heck. So, your comment is a big NOPE.

> Much of what you even KNOW about cloud-computing, spot markets, streaming, CDNs, etc was pioneered by netflix.

Let's not overstate the case. Much of this was around before (sometimes long before) Netflix's digital rise.

Re: It's Getting Harder to Tell Banks from Tech Companies

#188

Post by dgellow »

tryitnow wrote: post #44

This sounds like marketing baloney. I would bet most of that "engineering" headcount is actually just analytical headcount. not a bad thing, but it's not what we used to call engineering. This is part of an ongoing trend to describe everything as some form of "engineering." Honestly, if I'm going to Goldman for M&A - I want a human relationship. That relationship may be buttressed by research and analysis using "big…

To be honest Software Engineering looks like child play when compared to actual engineering work.

Imagine the left-pad incident in a different engineering domain.

Re: It's Getting Harder to Tell Banks from Tech Companies

#190

Post by AzzieElbab »

zjaffee wrote: post #123
123212321 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The truth is tech is not a force multiplier in finance, except for HFT. A few firms do pay a ton for engineers (higher than google level comp), but there are probably less than 5000 of those engineers in NYC.

This is absolutely false, tech is a force multiplier in nearly every business even if it doesn't require onsite software engineers to get that productivity bump. Look at the Bloomberg terminal in finance, Salesforce/CRM in sales, Epic in healthcare, Westlaw in legal work, the list goes on. Now a lot of the time, firms can get a better product by purchasing one than trying to build something in house (where anyone pro…

I am only familiar with these three "Bloomberg terminal in finance, Salesforce/CRM in sales, Epic in healthcare" and these products are not what I would call a good tech
Post reply on HN