4 ms·
Also, another major force is that big companies tend to only do business with other big companies or startups that are connected to big VC funds which they them
by jondubois 8y ago
Also, another major force is that big companies tend to only do business with other big companies or startups that are connected to big VC funds which they themselves control or have strong connections with.
If your startup did not receive funding from a big VC, then big companies will not do business with you and they will not use your product. It's incestuous and downright discriminatory.
Companies are not legally allowed to discriminate based on race, gender or religion but they are allowed to discriminate based on how much capital you have and where you got it from. It's discrimination against the financially disconnected; it's not better at all and it's a vicious cycle.
- ladberg 8y agoWhile I don't really like the idea of what follows from it, companies choosing which other companies to do business with based on their capital makes perfect sense and shouldn't be banned.
- quxbar 8y agoWhat about companies choosing to use inferior products because their board own a stake in the producer? What if the majority of shareholders are hurt by this choice, but they're unaware that it's being made? It's extremely common in my field and causes noticeable market inefficiency.
- jondubois 8y agoExactly, it's the same force at play and it's arguably capitalism's biggest problem. Nepotism (if it can be called that) tends to be inversely proportional to efficiency. In most technical fields, the person you know is almost certainly not the best person for the job.