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

eBay Rejects GameStop's $56B Takeover as Not Credible

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 251 posts

Re: eBay Rejects GameStop's $56B Takeover as Not Credible

#141

Post by Edman274 »

boringg wrote: post #14
SwellJoe wrote: post #3

Any reasonable person could see this was a ridiculous clown show, put on by the ridiculous clown show meme stock company.

I mean they make a good point -- ebay isn't a serious company anymore. It really needs someone with a vision to rebuild it. That its limping along and executives are essentially bleeding a previously valuable internet asset dry is kind of sad.

They can't rebuild it. Facebook Marketplace is allowing people to buy and sell locally for free with systems for managing fraud that are more robust than Craigslist. How do you rebuild when a way larger company - with a side project of theirs - offers one of your core businesses for free?

Re: eBay Rejects GameStop's $56B Takeover as Not Credible

#142

Post by noelsusman »

conorcleary wrote: post #96
imglorp wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dilated pupils. Delayed responses. Inattentive gaze. Speaking nonsense. Drugs might explain many things.

He works his ass off. You obviously can't spot a bear trap :-) The lower range of $GME the past couple of years is nowhere near where the shorts are going to have to buy-in.

...ya'll are still doing this?

Re: eBay Rejects GameStop's $56B Takeover as Not Credible

#143

Post by rtkwe »

mh- wrote: post #137
rtkwe wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The math doesn't actually math. Even if you're not discounting the cash on hand from GME's value all of GME's market value, plus their cash on hand, plus the "highly confident" $20B still doesn't add up to the take over value in Cohen's letter.

I know it doesn't. But I felt like parent commenter was offering to explain what CNBC and the rest of us didn't understand, that he does. TLDR: half cash, half stock.

i t ' s o n t h e w e b s i t e . . .

What a bizarre interview that was. The least damaging interpretation is he was intentionally being bad to spite CNBC in a basically (though their explanation doesn't include this) childish fit for earlier bad coverage of GME.

Re: eBay Rejects GameStop's $56B Takeover as Not Credible

#144

Post by [deleted] »

sigmar wrote: post #76
avonmach wrote: post #46

Seems like a no brainer for people who want to go into a physical store without dealing with the hassle of waiting for the item to sell along with packaging and shipping.

ebay started attempting consignment more than ten years ago, but I think lately they only do it for luxury items. Which makes sense to me as a lot of people would just send in junk. https://pages.ebay.com/ebay-consignment/

[deleted]

Re: eBay Rejects GameStop's $56B Takeover as Not Credible

#145

Post by Scoundreller »

SwellJoe wrote: post #131
xp84 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this really a big problem for buyers now? Asking genuinely, not rhetorically. In my experience with eBay (my account is 25 years old), the one thing you could count on is that buyers who receive nothing, or get a box of bricks, or broken items or whatever, basically 100% of the time, will get refunded - if necessary, by eBay itself. (This has been frustrating of course for honest sellers who get scammed by buyers.…

It makes it feel sketchy. I don't know what the state of buyer protection is. I've read that sellers sometimes list in other countries to get around the PayPal buyer protections or otherwise get paid via some unprotected method. I can't believe all those hundreds of thousands of listings would continue to exist if there weren't some kind of pay off. Somebody's got to be making money somehow, as it's been happening fo…

> I've read that sellers sometimes list in other countries to get around the PayPal buyer protections

The buyer protections don’t really vary much, but it’s true in some countries they get more protections but it’s more regarding to buyer’s remorse rather than Items Not As Described.

> or otherwise get paid via some unprotected method

At least in North America (and maybe everywhere else), you’ve been required to pay via eBay for all transactions for the last decade or more. No more money orders, bank transfers, cheques or wire transfers or cash. And you can’t easily contact sellers/buyers directly anymore, it’s all through the platform and they block a lot of suspect messages/keywords.

Re: eBay Rejects GameStop's $56B Takeover as Not Credible

#146

Post by NortySpock »

TravisJamison wrote: post #43
qrush wrote: post #16

As a avid eBay customer I am pretty relieved. I buy 2-3 items a month and was selling for the last 2 years on the platform. It's come such a long way and is really a great, streamlined experience. Of course I'm sure folks that make their living off their stores & sales will have different opinions, but I'd say as a routine customer and seller it doesn't need an external company's takeover pressure on it.

Are you trading collectibles? I’m just genuinely curious what someone would buy with 2-3 transactions a month.

(a) used books. As a Midwesterner I love that can directly order specific technology books (the ones everyone recommends), literally from a Goodwill in San Francisco, for the price of a good meal

(b) dodging Amazon co-mingling of inventory. Do I trust Amazon doing whatever it wants in a warehouse, or some eBay seller with a few years of built-up-reputation to lose but who specializes in the part I want? Let me tell you I have gotten a lot more handwritten thank-you-for-your-purchase notes from eBay sellers than Amazon. 3D printer parts, used computers+parts for the homelab, laser printer replacement parts, etc.

(Yes Amazon said they would stop recently... Not sure I believe it's fixed yet)

Re: eBay Rejects GameStop's $56B Takeover as Not Credible

#147

Post by rtkwe »

tombert wrote: post #99
xp84 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

^This. The crazy part is that in today’s PE-style system of things, the incentives… - GameStop shareholders - GameStop the company - e.g. employees - eBay shareholders - eBay the company - for example its employees …aren’t necessarily aligned. If GAME buys EBAY - it’s an exit for the EBAY shareholders, which is easy for them to evaluate as it’s presumably a $ premium over the share price today. If GAME then runs the…

If this deal does eventually go through, then it might be a good time for someone to start working on a competitor to take over the online auction space.

The biggest headache has always been fraud, eBay gets if from both sides and it's a pretty intractable problem to solve as the middle man.

Re: eBay Rejects GameStop's $56B Takeover as Not Credible

#148

Post by sirbutters »

matwood wrote: post #78
CodeWriter23 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This movie isn't over yet. We'll have to wait and see if GameStop goes full 80's on them with a hostile takeover attempt.

GME had already acquired ~5% of Ebay shares ahead of the offer.

Why didn't Cohen buy 100% of eBay shares. What is he, stupid?

Re: eBay Rejects GameStop's $56B Takeover as Not Credible

#149

Post by conradev »

cryptoegorophy wrote: post #101
hx8 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. eBay has a strong brand, one of the oldest web brands. It should just continue doing what it's doing.

They probably should do more marketing.

This is a good joke because they spent $2.4B on marketing in FY25
Post reply on HN