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

Google considered coordinated, multinational hostile takeover attempt of Epic

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 28 posts

Re: Google considered coordinated, multinational hostile takeover attempt of Epic

#11

Post by rebelos »

Macha wrote: post #8
rebelos wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Dubbed the Open App Markets Act, it would let you install apps from places other than Apple's App Store or Google's Play Store, which both come pre-installed on iPhones and Androids, respectively. > The industry calls that sideloading, and if it's allowed, would mark a turning point in the companies' iron grip on how people access apps and use their phones. https://www.businessinsider.com/google-apple-app-store-dow…

Android already allows sideloading. Epic's lawsuit against Google is about the Play Store being an all or nothing affair. If you want in the play store you use their IAPs, or you do what Epic has done and make your users sideload and deal with the extra tech support and discoverability challenges that presents. Epic want to be in the store but not use Google's IAPs. This is a bit different from the listed act and the…

> Although Google leaves open the technical possibility for Android consumers to acquire some apps without using the Play Store, this can only be accomplished through a competing app store installed on the device (either through preloading by an OEM or through the user sideloading the store), or through sideloading of individual apps. Google takes various steps to discourage OEMs from directly competing or sponsoring any app store competition. Google makes the sideloading process unnecessarily cumbersome and impractical by adding superfluous, misleading, and discouraging security warnings and by deterring users by requiring them to grant permission multiple times for a single app installation (discussed in more detail in Sections I.C. and I.D. below). The effect of Google’s conduct is to practically eliminate competition in Android app distribution.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20210707/17411147129/googl...

Re: Google considered coordinated, multinational hostile takeover attempt of Epic

#12

Post by saladuh »

Okay this is probably a stupid question, but how would Google go about doing this when Tim Sweeney is adamant that he owns over 50% of Epic's shares and Tencent only has a 'non-controlling' (as Sweeney has said in the past) 40%? As Epic is a private company, I don't understand how this is possible, but then again I'm not well versed in this stuff at all.

Re: Google considered coordinated, multinational hostile takeover attempt of Epic

#13

Post by aaomidi »

heybrendan wrote: post #9

The title of this seems... precarious. Wouldn't a better title be something along the lines of... > Epic alleges Google considered [a] coordinated, multinational, hostile takeover attempt [of their business] ... given legal proceedings seem to be on-going? Also, from TFA: > In a statement, a Google spokesperson said, "As we have stated previously, Epic's lawsuit is baseless and mischaracterizes our business conversat…

I'm flagging this comment because OP has no affiliation posted on their profile but seem very interestingly pro google in their comments.

I would feel less weird about this if an affiliation was posted, but asking the moderation team to change something that's highly critical of Google is weird to me considering the post history.

Re: Google considered coordinated, multinational hostile takeover attempt of Epic

#16

Post by YeBanKo »

saladuh wrote: post #12

Okay this is probably a stupid question, but how would Google go about doing this when Tim Sweeney is adamant that he owns over 50% of Epic's shares and Tencent only has a 'non-controlling' (as Sweeney has said in the past) 40%? As Epic is a private company, I don't understand how this is possible, but then again I'm not well versed in this stuff at all.

> 'to either (a) buy Epic shares from Tencent to get more control over Epic', or '(b) join up with Tencent to buy 100% of Epic,'" the complaint said.

Unless it is accompanied by some nefarious actions to force them to sell, it’s should be “Google considered acquiring Epic”

Re: Google considered coordinated, multinational hostile takeover attempt of Epic

#17

Post by ffhhj »

caique wrote: post #15
ffhhj wrote: post #14

Epic is losing a great opportunity to build a gaming device with a friendly developer store and kick Google/Apple stores.

Like the Valve Steam Deck?

Yeah, whatever helps breaking those monopolistic stores.

Re: Google considered coordinated, multinational hostile takeover attempt of Epic

#18

Post by emptyparadise »

saladuh wrote: post #12

Okay this is probably a stupid question, but how would Google go about doing this when Tim Sweeney is adamant that he owns over 50% of Epic's shares and Tencent only has a 'non-controlling' (as Sweeney has said in the past) 40%? As Epic is a private company, I don't understand how this is possible, but then again I'm not well versed in this stuff at all.

They'd do it with a big enough check.

Re: Google considered coordinated, multinational hostile takeover attempt of Epic

#19

Post by heybrendan »

aaomidi wrote: post #13
heybrendan wrote: post #9

The title of this seems... precarious. Wouldn't a better title be something along the lines of... > Epic alleges Google considered [a] coordinated, multinational, hostile takeover attempt [of their business] ... given legal proceedings seem to be on-going? Also, from TFA: > In a statement, a Google spokesperson said, "As we have stated previously, Epic's lawsuit is baseless and mischaracterizes our business conversat…

I'm flagging this comment because OP has no affiliation posted on their profile but seem very interestingly pro google in their comments. I would feel less weird about this if an affiliation was posted, but asking the moderation team to change something that's highly critical of Google is weird to me considering the post history.

Notwithstanding my affiliation is no one's business but my own (it's not a rule on HN), your claim is rather baseless: I read the article, directly cited it, and asked for a review to ensure something more consistent with reality. This community call mods' attention to title alteration requests regularly.

In fact, you're out of bounds:

> Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. [1]

I have a strong distaste for hyperbole and {mis,dis}information. That doesn't make me pro-Google. At best, I'd characterize myself as all-FAANG-ambivalent.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Google considered coordinated, multinational hostile takeover attempt of Epic

#20

Post by ampdepolymerase »

emptyparadise wrote: post #18
saladuh wrote: post #12

Okay this is probably a stupid question, but how would Google go about doing this when Tim Sweeney is adamant that he owns over 50% of Epic's shares and Tencent only has a 'non-controlling' (as Sweeney has said in the past) 40%? As Epic is a private company, I don't understand how this is possible, but then again I'm not well versed in this stuff at all.

They'd do it with a big enough check.

Tim's on the low end of billionaires. Google can easily buy him out.
Post reply on HN