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

Apple buys a company every three to four weeks

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 156 posts

Re: Apple buys a company every three to four weeks

#51

Post by biztos »

humbledrone wrote: post #28
fpo wrote: post #16

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…

> do have to interview to remain employed

Would that be a full-on interview as if they were applying for a job, or just some kind of "cultural fit" screening?

It seems contradictory to me: if the hire is important enough to spend a lot of money on (even via an earn-out) then why alienate them with uncertainty about the offer?

I guess the assumption is they don't have a better offer?

But if a few key employees get together then don't they have the ability to scuttle the whole deal? "Keep doing this thing that Apple was willing to buy, but on better terms, and look for a new buyer" sounds like a pretty good alternative to "take Apple's earn-out on Apple's terms with nonzero risk of getting nothing."

Re: Apple buys a company every three to four weeks

#52

Post by root_axis »

sircastor wrote: post #18
conception wrote: post #12

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.

It seems to me that Apple buys companies because they want to research and build a technology into their products, rather than eliminate competitors. It seems to me they’re more interested in the talent than the market. That kind of behavior I attribute to Facebook.

Huh? This seems totally backwards to me. Stripping down an acquisition to incorporate it into the acquiring company is the ultimate competitor crushing strategy; buy up all the best technology and sell it exclusively through your locked-down walled garden. Apple products integrate with Apple products and nothing else by design. Granted, the Facebook product is an absolute cancer on society, but Facebook's acquisitions have continued to thrive while still maintaining their original product visions e.g. whatsapp, instagram, oculus. Frankly, I think you're viewing things fan-colored glasses.

Re: Apple buys a company every three to four weeks

#53

Post by dr_kiszonka »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #2

I'm beginning to think maintaining competitive markets requires broader criteria. Like any of super-majority share of: market volume, revenue within a market, influence over market, consumer harm, significant reduction in number of competitors.

I like this list. I'd add collection of behavioral data of a significant proportion of the population.

("Behavioral data" and "significant proportion" would require good definitions; I am not a policy maker, so I am leaving it to those sharper than me.)

Re: Apple buys a company every three to four weeks

#54

Post by biztos »

wlll wrote: post #41
texasbigdata wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So...26 a year? That's in the same range.

Everyone I know goes once a week. once every two weeks and you'd start to run out of fresh produce in week 2.

Interesting.

I was going once every three weeks to reduce Covid risk, household of two, normal American-sized fridge with freezer, cooking six nights a week. We would run out of vegetables during the third week, but it had the advantage that we ate all the veggies!

Re: Apple buys a company every three to four weeks

#55

Post by M2Ys4U »

conception wrote: post #12
SllX wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why?

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.

> 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.

In the US, maybe. Other jurisdictions take different views.

Re: Apple buys a company every three to four weeks

#56

Post by spideymans »

root_axis wrote: post #52
sircastor wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me that Apple buys companies because they want to research and build a technology into their products, rather than eliminate competitors. It seems to me they’re more interested in the talent than the market. That kind of behavior I attribute to Facebook.

Huh? This seems totally backwards to me. Stripping down an acquisition to incorporate it into the acquiring company is the ultimate competitor crushing strategy; buy up all the best technology and sell it exclusively through your locked-down walled garden. Apple products integrate with Apple products and nothing else by design . Granted, the Facebook product is an absolute cancer on society, but Facebook's acquisitio…

>Huh? This seems totally backwards to me. Stripping down an acquisition to incorporate it into the acquiring company is the ultimate competitor crushing strategy;

It's not as if Apple lacks competition capable of doing the exact same.

Re: Apple buys a company every three to four weeks

#57

Post by SllX »

root_axis wrote: post #52
sircastor wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me that Apple buys companies because they want to research and build a technology into their products, rather than eliminate competitors. It seems to me they’re more interested in the talent than the market. That kind of behavior I attribute to Facebook.

Huh? This seems totally backwards to me. Stripping down an acquisition to incorporate it into the acquiring company is the ultimate competitor crushing strategy; buy up all the best technology and sell it exclusively through your locked-down walled garden. Apple products integrate with Apple products and nothing else by design . Granted, the Facebook product is an absolute cancer on society, but Facebook's acquisitio…

Most small businesses fail. Nobody put a gun to their head and told them to take the money and the W2 salaries; each company was in a position to assess their own situations and make their own choice about whether to be acquired or try to stay independent and succeed or fail on their own. Other companies have said “no” to Apple in the past, Dropbox most famously.

Re: Apple buys a company every three to four weeks

#58

Post by root_axis »

The HN commentary on this article is amusing to me. Every story about a big tech company on this forum is a lecture on our degenerate age of failed antitrust law, but when it comes to Apple we're treated to a litany of "so what?". Honestly, I don't mind Apple's acquisitions (though I do wish I was living in a world where I could buy an M1 the same way I can buy an i7), but I just felt compelled to drop this little nugget of off-topic meta-commentary. Carry on.

Re: Apple buys a company every three to four weeks

#59

Post by jariel »

gibolt wrote: post #26
jariel wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is not the money - it's the ability to integrate. M&A and cooltech is by far the easiest part. Making use of the tech, the talent, operational integration, re-writes vs. integration, product alignment, etc. it's very hard on every level. What do you do with the VP of a 50 person company, now they are managers in a little team, the software might be discarded, or just a few ideas used from it etc. etc..

You only need 1 to pay off for it to be worth it. The rest can be deprecated and team reallocated. Not saying it is right, but makes sense for a business of that scale.

No this is not quite it.

These acquisitions are not 'big bangs' like VC investments where one will make the bank.

They are large and small investments across the board - some for know-how, some for talent, some for product, some for brand (ie Beats), some for code etc..

An acquisition is expensive beyond the price tag, especially in terms of opportunity cost if you bet on the buy and it fails.

Re: Apple buys a company every three to four weeks

#60

Post by jariel »

qbasic_forever wrote: post #45
jariel wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is not the money - it's the ability to integrate. M&A and cooltech is by far the easiest part. Making use of the tech, the talent, operational integration, re-writes vs. integration, product alignment, etc. it's very hard on every level. What do you do with the VP of a 50 person company, now they are managers in a little team, the software might be discarded, or just a few ideas used from it etc. etc..

I have to imagine any executive leadership team that agrees to an Apple acquisition is only looking at the exit package of stock they'll be counting in a couple years. They know what they're signing up for and know how the game works better than anyone. It's their setup for getting into venture capitol investing, retirement, etc. For a very small few they might stick around because they genuinely want to be part of t…

Often the payouts are necessarily big enough, it entirely depends.

And just because you're an 'exec' at an 'ok startup' doesn't mean you're generally qualified at that level. It's very hard to jump to another, similar job in the field.

Post reply on HN