Live data from Hacker News

Venture Predation

papers.ssrn.com

141–150 of 231 posts

Re: Venture Predation

#141

And don't forget Amazon. They aren't venture backed but they have access to capital at cheaper rates than most countries due to their position as a stock market darling. They use ultra-cheap money and a willingness to run negative margins which they refer to "reinvesting in the business" to bleed competitors dry. Few other companies on the planet have the ability to run negative or break-even margins the way Amazon d…

Amazon isn't unique in this case. Your example is a bit of cherry picking. These tactics are common in retail (demonstrated by the fact that WMT, AMZ, and COST are the top 3 retailers in the world). > access to capital at cheaper rates than most countries due to their position as a stock market darling Last I recall, AMZ uses an internal WACC of 8-9%. That's really only marginally "cheaper" cost of capital than most…

[deleted]

Re: Venture Predation

#143

And don't forget Amazon. They aren't venture backed but they have access to capital at cheaper rates than most countries due to their position as a stock market darling. They use ultra-cheap money and a willingness to run negative margins which they refer to "reinvesting in the business" to bleed competitors dry. Few other companies on the planet have the ability to run negative or break-even margins the way Amazon d…

Quidsi founder Marc Lore sold his next company, Jet.com, to Walmart for $3.3 billion [1]. Both Quidsi and Jet.com were never profitable, meaning Lore was also playing the game of venture predation, so hardly any pity from me. To add, Lore's current startup is a premium food delivery service called Wondery that raised $350 million at at $3.5bn valuation last year [2], and it's not profitable too. None of Lore's compan…

> Lore's current startup is a premium food delivery service called Wondery

A brilliant strategy! Amazon already owns a Wondery[0] so they can't acquire his.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wondery

Re: Venture Predation

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a nugget of an interesting concept here. I would like to know more, but I would also like to know more from the folks downvoting you as to why they disagree. Could you please expand on your thought? I know some recent conversation has been had about the potential that open source models have to "win" against Big Tech, so I'd love to know how your thought accounts for that as well.

It seems obvious, they are burning through Microsoft's money for now (it was said these chatbots cost way more to run than they make profit) to capture the market and be able to get thick margins later.

> it was said these chatbots cost way more to run than they make profit

Well if it's running on Azure and using massively overpriced Nvidia data center GPUs I can't imagine anything else would be possible. Then again it's not like there any incentive for OpenAI to increase efficiency as long they get 'free' Azure credits (and it's not like the real cost for MS is anything close to what they are supposedly investing into OpenAI. IRRC that 10 billion was mainly not in actual money)

Re: Venture Predation

#145

And don't forget Amazon. They aren't venture backed but they have access to capital at cheaper rates than most countries due to their position as a stock market darling. They use ultra-cheap money and a willingness to run negative margins which they refer to "reinvesting in the business" to bleed competitors dry. Few other companies on the planet have the ability to run negative or break-even margins the way Amazon d…

> Diapers.com example: "When Bezos’s lieutenants learned of Wal-Mart’s counterbid, they ratcheted up the pressure, telling the Quidsi founders that [Bezos] was such a furious competitor that he would drive diaper prices to zero if they sold to Bentonville.

How is this not a serious anti-competitive monopolistic practice? Did the Dept of Justice get involved?

Re: Venture Predation

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That analysis of Windows history is fiction. Plausible business school fiction but fiction nevertheless.

What part is incorrect?

I am not the person who replied to you and I don't know to what extent that tale is fiction, but MS was enormously profitable selling Windows to OEMs and consumers before NT became a major force. NT was more of a response to OS/2 than it was some grand plan at grabbing the enterprise market that was hatched years earlier.

Re: Venture Predation

#147
post #20

In international trade this is called “dumping”, and it’s often considered illegal and most definitely unfair It’s usually used as a reason for regulating imports/exports https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/dumping.asp#:~:text=Dum... .

Startups play the game of customer acquisition costs above the revenue all the time. If we want to discuss this issues we need to skip cherry picking.

Re: Venture Predation

#148
post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have money because of AWS, which is a fantastic product in an extremely competitive market, competing against players who lose money like GCP and Azure. Amazon.com as a store makes next to nothing as profit. Who cares what he did to some diaper companies. Are consumers paying more or less because of amazon? Much less. They basically run amazon.com for no profit and consumers get fantastic deals and cheaper produ…

I care because once Amazon kills all their competitors then they are the only ones selling diapers. And then they can charge 10 bucks per diaper.

And then someone sees that people are buying diapers for 10 bucks and starts selling them for 5.

Re: Venture Predation

#149
post #121
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see the problem. They apparently believe in a low margin, high volume play with support being a volume driver. They might be right or wrong, but I wouldn't want it to be illegal as a business model. Investors and companies have to be free to lose money or else we've just got a centrally planned economy where every business has to offer the same product at the same price.

The problem is society is witnessing races between Tortoises and Hares, where the Hares are doped with venture backing. A healthy society progresses slowly like a tortoise, encountering actual tradeoffs that aren't masked by mountains of cash only to ensure cancerous returns for already rich people at the expense of skilled business owners who are actually designing their businesses to handle endgame stressors. In an…

I get your meaning, but not all competition is sport. You don't have to go horse to horse with your competition if you have an F-35.

Re: Venture Predation

#150

And don't forget Amazon. They aren't venture backed but they have access to capital at cheaper rates than most countries due to their position as a stock market darling. They use ultra-cheap money and a willingness to run negative margins which they refer to "reinvesting in the business" to bleed competitors dry. Few other companies on the planet have the ability to run negative or break-even margins the way Amazon d…

They have money because of AWS, which is a fantastic product in an extremely competitive market, competing against players who lose money like GCP and Azure. Amazon.com as a store makes next to nothing as profit. Who cares what he did to some diaper companies. Are consumers paying more or less because of amazon? Much less. They basically run amazon.com for no profit and consumers get fantastic deals and cheaper produ…

> who lose money like GCP and Azure

Really? First time I'm hearing Azure is unprofitable. In fact "Intelligent Cloud" which I assume is mainly Azure is their most profitable business...

If I understand it correctly (probably not) they actually have higher margins than AWS?

Post reply on HN