5 ms·

To me, it would be disappointing if they broke up the firm to the point where R&D has to survive w/o subsidies. US science research funding has not kept up. I'm

To me, it would be disappointing if they broke up the firm to the point where R&D has to survive w/o subsidies. US science research funding has not kept up. I'm glad the likes of Google have kept pace with corporate R&D. Consider for a moment where self-driving-car technology would be w/o Google subsidizing it. Or mapping technology. Or like a dozen other technologies. Were these supposed to pop up w/ VC struggling from round to round? Many of the VC backed companies themselves have a put option of being acquired by Google/FAANG -- so if that exit is gone, it would be even worse.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
AlexandrB 6y ago
> so if that exit is gone, it would be even worse Worse for whom? As a customer, I groan every time a product I use gets acquired by FAANG because I know it's going to get shuttered in a few months. Edit: Or in the case of large acquisitions like Instagram slowly integrated with the parent company's shitty products.
- TuringNYC 6y ago
  >> Worse for whom? Worse for those in the real world where you have payroll obligations, rent, AWS bills, health insurance, and mortgages. As a customer I feel the same way. However, having been a co-founder and CTO of a startup, let me tell you the real story: - Most startups are not like snapchat, they are not once-in-a-generation unicorns. - Most startups have huge burn, especially consumer-entertainment type startups (imagine how much network bandwidth YouTube was burning before Google purchased them.) - Startups are at the mercy of funding rounds and sometimes the market itsself can get away from you, through no fault of your own startup - FAANG provide a put option -- "whats the worse that can happen? we get acquired by X" which allows people to take on more risk while trying to swing for the fences. - It is arguable how long darling consumer apps could survive as independent when consumers often dont want to pay money. It is a catch 22 -- the startup is told the product has to be free but they are also not allowed to seek bigger coffers to actually subsidize it So in the end -- sure, I agree with you, but who pays? Esp if this is something massive with network effects. Perhaps I can pay for WhatsApp, but can my grandma pay for it with her meager overseas salary? And if she cannot, how is the network sustainable? I'm not saying I disagree with you, but I dont know what the solution is other than the current one.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- Aunche 6y ago
  This implies that the product wouldn't be shuttered if it weren't acquired. Startups aren't extactly know for their longevity. Some were intended to be sold to a FAANG on day one. As for Instagram, products are cool until their investors start expecting them to turn a profit.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
kristo 6y ago
God forbid we don’t get self driving cars

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

AlexandrB 6y ago

> so if that exit is gone, it would be even worse Worse for whom? As a customer, I groan every time a product I use gets acquired by FAANG because I know it's going to get shuttered in a few months. Edit: Or in the case of large acquisitions like Instagram slowly integrated with the parent company's shitty products.

TuringNYC 6y ago
>> Worse for whom? Worse for those in the real world where you have payroll obligations, rent, AWS bills, health insurance, and mortgages. As a customer I feel the same way. However, having been a co-founder and CTO of a startup, let me tell you the real story: - Most startups are not like snapchat, they are not once-in-a-generation unicorns. - Most startups have huge burn, especially consumer-entertainment type startups (imagine how much network bandwidth YouTube was burning before Google purchased them.) - Startups are at the mercy of funding rounds and sometimes the market itsself can get away from you, through no fault of your own startup - FAANG provide a put option -- "whats the worse that can happen? we get acquired by X" which allows people to take on more risk while trying to swing for the fences. - It is arguable how long darling consumer apps could survive as independent when consumers often dont want to pay money. It is a catch 22 -- the startup is told the product has to be free but they are also not allowed to seek bigger coffers to actually subsidize it So in the end -- sure, I agree with you, but who pays? Esp if this is something massive with network effects. Perhaps I can pay for WhatsApp, but can my grandma pay for it with her meager overseas salary? And if she cannot, how is the network sustainable? I'm not saying I disagree with you, but I dont know what the solution is other than the current one.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
Aunche 6y ago
This implies that the product wouldn't be shuttered if it weren't acquired. Startups aren't extactly know for their longevity. Some were intended to be sold to a FAANG on day one. As for Instagram, products are cool until their investors start expecting them to turn a profit.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

kristo 6y ago

God forbid we don’t get self driving cars