131–140 of 156 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
can you name a business that is completely unrelated to Apple or Amazon and would not see significant benefits from being absorbed?
For apple :- a farm, cattle station, cement factory, brick maker, carpets, upholstery, chicken farm the list goes on
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This sort of perception about community bias comes up with every $BigCo. Then the comments complaining about it get highly upvoted, undermining the supposed observation. I think it has more to do with how our emotions subtly influence how we weight what we read. We're more likely to notice the cases we dislike/disagree with and let the ones we like/agree with glide by without affecting our impression of the community…
Part of the concern is Apple spends a ton of money marketing themselves as "pro-privacy and pro-consumer, more than those "other" $BigCo's". I've seen people say they're immune to advertising and then beat the Apple drum many times.
I mean they also seem to deliver functionality that is pro-privacy, since of course their money doesn't depend on violating your privacy. Two of the other BigCo's business models are built on violating your privacy, and the other one certainly makes more money on its retail efforts by doing so.
So the scary quote marks up there seem a bit weird given the circumstances.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because right now price is about the only criteria really considered today. You can stifle innovation and competition as long as the prices stay low.
> price [for consumers] is about the only criteria really considered today. Blame the past 50 years of GOP-dominated Supreme Court jurisprudence, which has steadily eroded antitrust enforcement. Vote for the Democratic party in Senate and Presidential races, and something might happen to fix this in about 30–40 years when the Court turns over enough to give Democrat-appointed Justices a majority.
Fortunately, changing the antitrust criteria 'merely' requires convincing Congress, which is doable within a saner timeframe.
So ~15 companies a year? That doesn't sound outrageous for a company with billions and billions of dollars in the bank, and billions more coming in every quarter. edit: If anything there's probably immense pressure on Cook to buy buy buy more stuff. I don't think anyone inside Apple wants to have a repeat of stuff like old Apple maps or other products that just languished and died internally while external companies…
how it doesn't? it does!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They wouldn't extend an offer to you in this case. Acqui-hires have no upside for employees and barely any for founders. Some small return to investors to sign off on the acquihire. Usually most people still have to interview for their jobs.
The hypothetical case I was describing was when the employees (say, 1-5 people) are also the sole shareholders. Supposing I write a _killer app_ with a friend and get a patent for it - and it ends up with tens of millions of users quickly - and Apple really wants it for themselves at short notice (too short a notice for them to try to recreate the software code, sic their legal team to invalidate the patent and marke…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They wouldn't extend an offer to you in this case. Acqui-hires have no upside for employees and barely any for founders. Some small return to investors to sign off on the acquihire. Usually most people still have to interview for their jobs.
Acquihires do often have employee upside, in the form of large stock-based compensation grants or bonus payouts, typically spread over a vesting period of several years. There's no point in the acquihire if you don't retain the employees, and relative to the cost to acquire the company these payouts aren't huge. You're right that often people do have to interview to remain employed (and thus to receive these benefits…
So ~15 companies a year? That doesn't sound outrageous for a company with billions and billions of dollars in the bank, and billions more coming in every quarter. edit: If anything there's probably immense pressure on Cook to buy buy buy more stuff. I don't think anyone inside Apple wants to have a repeat of stuff like old Apple maps or other products that just languished and died internally while external companies…
Apple is the biggest monopoly in the US right now. Hands down. They get to get away with everything! Google, Microsoft, Facebook, etc. all get hammered on the daily in the US and in the EU. But, Apple is a golden child that can do no wrong. Do you people not realize that they've created a peer-pressure device in the form of the iPhone by packaging SMS and iMessage into 1 app called "Messages"? How is that even legal?…
Keep downvoting me, fanboys! Long live the resistance!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's no point in buying an unrelated business that you're going to leave operating as usual - you might as well just invest that money on the stock market instead, or pay it out to your shareholders. So presumably if a company is buying a solution to X then it believes it can gain a competitive advantage by integrating X into the rest of its business. Given that, I would've thought that the earlier you buy the thi…
can you name a business that is completely unrelated to Apple or Amazon and would not see significant benefits from being absorbed?