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

Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

figma.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 1001 posts

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#181

Post by paulpan »

fnikacevic wrote: post #166
andsoitis wrote: post #156

Why did Figma want to sell itself to Adobe in the first place? Even though their revenue is only about $400MM, As far as I know, they make a very healthy profit (operating margin of ~90%), and they’ve also been expanding through organic and acquisition means (e.g. they bought Diagram). Is it because they see the ability to grow the company’s products even more given the Adobe footprint?

The $20B price was a massive overpay is the most likely reason.

This exactly. When someone offers you $20B, it's hard to turn it down. In Adobe's case, $20B is a bargain price to stifle a competitor.

Even if Figma founders didn't want to sell, all the VCs and other investors would force the hand.

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#182

Post by [deleted] »

max_ wrote: post #112

This really makes me sad as an aspiring entrepreneur. What would be the use of starting a business if the government can arbitrarily block it from being acquired? I understand this happening in Europe but not America. I think America is going to lag behind in tech entrepreneurship just like Europe and I wonder what the next potential tech entrepreneurship hub will be.

[deleted]

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#184

Post by tikkabhuna »

ddkper wrote: post #61
nolongerthere wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which I think is overall good for the consumer, many of the companies are only merging to lessen competition, not provide any extra value to us.

The value accrues in the form of incentivizing new products and companies to enter the market. The two options these founders (and their investors) have to capitalize on building a good company is to either go public or get acquired. Severely limiting the ability to be acquired reduces the incentives for new founders as well as investors in new companies if the only realistic path is waiting for them to go public. Es…

However, product innovation doesn't happen without competition. Acquisitions aren't necessarily bad, but a company being bought by a competitor with a similar product lessens competition and can lead to less innovation.

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#185

Post by itishappy »

robertlagrant wrote: post #139
Drakim wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially things like when a company owns the entire town and pays their workers in scrip. Both the company and worker is a consenting party, so the government should stay out of it. The problem with this ideology is that will destroy society and reduce it to ashes.

You think this is "ideology" that will cause that? > It shouldn't be normal to expect the government to be involved in approving things except where there's a great reason to need it.

Yes. Your quote is an example of the exact ideology that leads to Standard Oil and company towns.

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#186

Post by andsoitis »

34679 wrote: post #118
dkyc wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except outlawing acquisitions by larger tech companies will absolutely reduce funding and incentives to start companies, and result in less products, less companies, and less competition.

I doubt that is true. Let's say you're pitching your startup to a potential investor. Would you pitch it as "the next Adobe" or "something Adobe might want to buy"? Which one would you be more likely to invest in?

> pitch it as "the next Adobe" or "something Adobe might want to buy"? Which one would you be more likely to invest in?

I get your point, but that is not really the right framing because that is not how to pitch your startup.

Tell me what it does, what its long term vision is, how and by when you’ll make money, what’s your moat, how you will grow.

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#187

Post by barnabee »

ThomPete wrote: post #131

I see a lot of people in the thread thinking this is a good thing, it's not. First of all the reason for the UK not allowing the merger is completely absurd and based on a false premise which is most likely based on not understanding the field they are regulating. Regulation based on speculation about the future means that regulators can simply just make up reasons. Thats akin to when kings could just make up reason…

There is no way a company Adobe's size should ever be allowed to grow by acquisition. At a certain point that route needs to be cut off forever.

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#188

Post by kubrickslair »

pier25 wrote: post #119
zukzuk wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still mourn the end of Freehand. Illustrator’s UI never matched Freehand.

And Fireworks

Fireworks so elegantly captured the vector level control along with bitmap effects like Photoshop!

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#189

Post by andsoitis »

capableweb wrote: post #65
endisneigh wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes? What company makes money without providing goods or services to someone?

Patent trolling. Domain flipping. Just two I can think of in 30 seconds, I'm sure there are more out there :)

> Patent trolling. Domain flipping. Just two I can think of in 30 seconds, I'm sure there are more out there :)

In the vast sea of companies, those are a super teeny tiny share of companies.

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#190

Post by petercooper »

If countries want to heavily regulate business deals, I think the quid pro quo should be a tax system that provides a good way for founders and early employees to take some money off the table without having to sell to big companies like Adobe, by going public, or having half of any gain wiped out in taxes. Why shouldn't those folks able to pick up a lump sum for their work and the risk they took? They may as well have got a job at a big enterprise if an annual paycheck was all that mattered, and then you end up with fewer new companies and entrepreneurial risk-taking.
Post reply on HN