4 ms·

> The best start-ups keep being scooped up by the big guys (see Instagram and WhatsApp, owned by Facebook) Well, I don’t know. „Scooped up“ sounds very hostile

by baxtr 9y ago

> The best start-ups keep being scooped up by the big guys (see Instagram and WhatsApp, owned by Facebook) Well, I don’t know. „Scooped up“ sounds very hostile, in reality these startups were sold for a fortune. Also, the fact that you’re able to buy an innovative startup does not necessarily mean that you’ll integrate or run it successfully. Take for example google’s Nest or Motorola acquisition. Acquiring and sustaining is quite difficult.

j7ake 9y ago
Also the definition of "best start up" was not clearly defined, and perhaps only defined after they were bought for billions. If you defined a good startup by the amount of profit they generated, then instagram and whatsapp would have done worse than a lemonade stand. Even to this day it is not clear how much profit whatsapp has generated.
NicoJuicy 9y ago
They can measure the performance on social media + google queries. Then they can "scoop" it up before it's valued higher than themselves.
- icebraining 9y ago
  Why would they need social media or whatever? The startups themselves advertise their own success. It wasn't a secret that Whatsapp was growing tremendously.
- srtjstjsj 9y ago
  Facebook has direct analytics data due to their position as an indentity provider and other tool companies they own.
fragmede 9y ago
"Scooped up" is hostile - to end users. In the battle between Facebook Messenger and Instagram, Facebook was forced to innovate Facebook Messenger and actually add gasp features. Wait, no that was sidestepped when Facebook announced they'd bought Instagram. It wasn't until SNAP refused to sell out, that Facebook was forced to do anything something to Messenger (though in their desperation, they ruined it). For those among us at HN hoping to be acquired for giant piles of money, "scooped up" sounds almost paternal, but for the people who actually use the end product (which may different than the customers in the case of ad ware like Facebook), it's a warning sign to flee the platform. Even sustaining a merger is difficult, but what a company really wants when acquiring a tiny startup, long starved of "proper" resources, is for that startup to finally flourish and become the progenitor to a whole new industry with the help of the new parent company, and make all the shareholders piles more money. However, merging an acquisition is so difficult, and parent control (and branding) is so poisonous, that "Google came out with a camera that spies on you all the time" barely sounds like hyperbole. (I mean, it is, but there's nuance lost when talking about Alphabet-plus-all-child-companies level when they operate significant portions of the cloud, vs Nest, which as an upstart competitor, did not.

by baxtr 9y ago

j7ake 9y ago

Also the definition of "best start up" was not clearly defined, and perhaps only defined after they were bought for billions. If you defined a good startup by the amount of profit they generated, then instagram and whatsapp would have done worse than a lemonade stand. Even to this day it is not clear how much profit whatsapp has generated.

NicoJuicy 9y ago

They can measure the performance on social media + google queries. Then they can "scoop" it up before it's valued higher than themselves.

icebraining 9y ago
Why would they need social media or whatever? The startups themselves advertise their own success. It wasn't a secret that Whatsapp was growing tremendously.
srtjstjsj 9y ago
Facebook has direct analytics data due to their position as an indentity provider and other tool companies they own.

fragmede 9y ago

"Scooped up" is hostile - to end users. In the battle between Facebook Messenger and Instagram, Facebook was forced to innovate Facebook Messenger and actually add gasp features. Wait, no that was sidestepped when Facebook announced they'd bought Instagram. It wasn't until SNAP refused to sell out, that Facebook was forced to do anything something to Messenger (though in their desperation, they ruined it). For those among us at HN hoping to be acquired for giant piles of money, "scooped up" sounds almost paternal, but for the people who actually use the end product (which may different than the customers in the case of ad ware like Facebook), it's a warning sign to flee the platform. Even sustaining a merger is difficult, but what a company really wants when acquiring a tiny startup, long starved of "proper" resources, is for that startup to finally flourish and become the progenitor to a whole new industry with the help of the new parent company, and make all the shareholders piles more money. However, merging an acquisition is so difficult, and parent control (and branding) is so poisonous, that "Google came out with a camera that spies on you all the time" barely sounds like hyperbole. (I mean, it is, but there's nuance lost when talking about Alphabet-plus-all-child-companies level when they operate significant portions of the cloud, vs Nest, which as an upstart competitor, did not.