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

Adobe gives up on web-design product to rival Figma after deal collapse

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 233 posts

Re: Adobe gives up on web-design product to rival Figma after deal collapse

#201

Post by scarface_74 »

graemep wrote: post #82
lolinder wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> good public businesses > Private businesses don’t have to do anything Is this a baked-in legal distinction between public and private businesses, or is it that the company is supposed to do what the shareholders want and the shareholders of a private business are more likely than those of a public business to want something beyond ROI?

I think very often with private companies it is not just looking beyond ROI (they may do) but they also look longer term. A shareholder whose children will inherit the business one day will have a very different outlook to one who is looking at their annual performance numbers, which is the sort thing institutional shareholders are looking at.

The majority of family run businesses don’t last past the second generation

https://www.johnson.cornell.edu/smith-family-business-initia...

Re: Adobe gives up on web-design product to rival Figma after deal collapse

#202

Post by yacine_ »

j-bos wrote: post #190
yacine_ wrote: post #113

Am I crazy? is it really that hard? I built a web design product that rivals figma in a web browser in like a month, and bootstrapped the whole thing lmao

Care to post an invite code? I see your stuff via nitter, no DMs

it's monkey-ohio-wrath

good luck hopefully you use it before anyone else does

Re: Adobe gives up on web-design product to rival Figma after deal collapse

#203

Post by j-bos »

yacine_ wrote: post #202
j-bos wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to post an invite code? I see your stuff via nitter, no DMs

it's monkey-ohio-wrath good luck hopefully you use it before anyone else does

Thanks! Love that it just works!

Re: Adobe gives up on web-design product to rival Figma after deal collapse

#204

Post by smilespray »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #188
smilespray wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also kill good internal products because of infighting. ImageReady was nixed by the Photoshop guys.

ImageReady’s tooling (slicing, 2-Up/4-Up Save-for-Web, GIF frame editing, etc) was incorporated directly into Photoshop. It wasn’t “nixed”.

Of course it was. ImageReady was lean, fast and web-focused. When they killed it you had to buy a PS license and deal with the monolith PS was becoming.

If you're making web pages, you don't need CMYK workflows.

Re: Adobe gives up on web-design product to rival Figma after deal collapse

#205

Post by p_l »

jampekka wrote: post #137
p_l wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However, the stockholders could make a civil case that, as majority owners,they wanted to go that way, and with high enough offer and social perception that CEO must work to do so, they could make it a very bad time in courts - or possibly just replace the CEO with someone willing to burn the ckmpany for their profits.

Minority owners can and do sue and win even if the majority would agree to non-profit-maximizing decision.

Ugh, TIL.

I thought that if you managed to convince the majority you might be in the clear?

Re: Adobe gives up on web-design product to rival Figma after deal collapse

#206

Post by Reubend »

fnordprefect wrote: post #181
TylerE wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is anecdotes like this that make me think that the public shareholder model is fundamentally flawed and a large part of why many American companies are struggling to truly build long term value, and many once great companies have been destroyed by beancounters to bleating calls of shareholder value.

Don't worry - the conversation in the anecdote does not reflect the true position in the major common law countries at least. The public shareholder model is not doomed or flawed on this account. If an acquirer wants to acquire shares in a public company (or any company actually) it makes the offer to the shareholders and they are the ones who decide to accept or not. The proposed transaction is between the acquirer…

Thanks for this well written and insightful post! I had a lot of misconceptions about this that are cleared up now.

Re: Adobe gives up on web-design product to rival Figma after deal collapse

#207

Post by eviks »

duxup wrote: post #51
no_wizard wrote: post #2

Now Figma can become the de-facto choice for its software category and a merger was proved to be ultimately unnecessary for its survival and was a clear attempt at Adobe trying to buyout their competition because they can't seem to compete. I think overall this is a good thing. Adobe owning Figma isn't a great promise that it would be make Figma better, improve Figma in any way, nor keep Figma on the path of making h…

>but did Figma even need to sell in the first place? I've worked a company that was profitable, operated well, growing ... but were sold and the CEO said (I'll get the words not quite right): "I fought for keeping independent and not selling, that's how I've kept that company and I wanted it to stay that way. But the offer was increased into the range where I didn't feel like I could survive a legal challenge (if it…

If he liked building companies, that'd be another incentive to sell and build something else, not keeping it stable

Re: Adobe gives up on web-design product to rival Figma after deal collapse

#208

Post by mcmoor »

sumanthvepa wrote: post #43

I'm really disappointed for two reasons. First the existence of XD as a competitor kept Figma innovating and the price in check. Now, ironically Figma is the monopoly here! Second I have a creative cloud subscription and XD was good enough for me. Now I have to purchase Figma separately and also pay for Adobe CC because I still need the other software. So much for preserving consumer choice.

That's exactly what I thought. Do we end up with monopoly after all this time?

Re: Adobe gives up on web-design product to rival Figma after deal collapse

#209

Post by eviks »

fnordprefect wrote: post #181
TylerE wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is anecdotes like this that make me think that the public shareholder model is fundamentally flawed and a large part of why many American companies are struggling to truly build long term value, and many once great companies have been destroyed by beancounters to bleating calls of shareholder value.

Don't worry - the conversation in the anecdote does not reflect the true position in the major common law countries at least. The public shareholder model is not doomed or flawed on this account. If an acquirer wants to acquire shares in a public company (or any company actually) it makes the offer to the shareholders and they are the ones who decide to accept or not. The proposed transaction is between the acquirer…

Non-profits don't prove anything regarding for-profits since they live explicitly under different legal regimes and obligations

Re: Adobe gives up on web-design product to rival Figma after deal collapse

#210

Post by omnimus »

seanwilson wrote: post #192
omnimus wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sketch still has 120usd desktop version. Their solution was to add server/collaboration element that is subscription based. > This would put them under immense pressure to come up with new features (useful or not) to get people to upgrade. At some point for certain users, the current version is going to cover 90% of what they need and they won't see the point in upgrading. Isn't this backwards? If you don't have anyt…

Ah, didn't see that for Sketch, thanks. > If you don't have anything to add to the software why should you charge for it? That's fair, but then ~$150 is too cheap for a lifetime license for a major version of software if you're using that professionally for 5 years to generate $10,000s. Asking someone to pay a higher amount upfront is difficult though. > Also if anything software/hardware compatibility is always goin…

I agree that 150usd might be too cheap for pro market but like i mentioned maybe they found out they need to first go for amateurs. Who knows maybe they will make it more expensive in future or offer some kind of pro option.

I also have to mention maybe your expectations are a bit skewed? Software dev got cheaper and not everything has to be breakneck hype venture capital squeeze. There is type design software Glyphs (https://glyphsapp.com/) used by basically every typedesigner now. It costs 300usd and it is very complex. But they seem to be doing OK. Its so niche compared to Affinity that there is maybe 5% of potential customers? Both Affinity and Glyphs are small private companies from europe where devs cost less. Maybe they are fine with smaller teams, slower pace and just OK profits.

Post reply on HN