5 ms·

> or Blizzard, This so much. 10 years ago, I would have bought every single Blizzard game. Back then, I explained to my parents that Blizzard was like Mercede

> or Blizzard, This so much. 10 years ago, I would have bought every single Blizzard game. Back then, I explained to my parents that Blizzard was like Mercedes ("The best or nothing") for video games. Now all known talents have already left Blizzard and none of their games interest me any longer...

ChuckNorris89 5y ago
Isn't this what inevitably happens to all companies eventually? You have a group of enthusiastic founders who make it big through smarts, passion and dedication and after a couple of decades, they retire, and the company is now mostly formed of people who are in just to cash in on the money and fame from having that brand name on their resume as people who are as smart, passionate and dedicated as the original founders were would most likely work on their own idea rather than said famous company. On the tech circles online Google is known for being the place where you grind leet-code to get in so you can make big $ and coast (rest and vest), not break your back working on fancy world changing ideas. The latter is for start-ups. Apple was ahead of the game too as they had the visionary Steve Jobs at the helm, while now, sure their stock is as high as ever and their M1 macs are great but you don't really see people queuing up for days in front of their shops anymore since their post-Jobs strategy has been less about disruptive innovation and more about entrenching and expanding their existing positions by leveraging their supply chain prowess.
- oblio 5y ago
  https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2001/01/18/big-macs-vs-the-naked-chef/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2001/01/18/big-macs-vs-the-na... > Summary, so far: > Some things need talent to do really well. > It’s hard to scale talent. > One way people try to scale talent is by having the talent create rules for the untalented to follow. > The quality of the resulting product is very low.
- regularfry 5y ago
  Not just companies. Reversion to the mean is ubiquitous.
- aqsalose 5y ago
  I think Mercedes is still Mercedes of cars?
  - ChuckNorris89 5y ago
    Not in Europe. Mercedes was the Mercedes of cars when the S-Class was the pinnacle of automotive technology and only the rich and famous could afford them so they also had exclusivity going for them. Nowadays, the S-Class is no longer nexus tech and thanks to cheap credit and rock bottom devaluation on the second hand market, they're not at all exclusive that even in the poorer parts of town where I live, there are lots of Mercedes and in Germany they're used as taxis.
    - dekhn 5y ago
      mercedes were used as taxis when I visited germany.... 30 years ago.
  - jmrm 5y ago
    The most important models, like the S class, the G class, and the AMG GT, still are the top notch in quality, quirks, and performance, but the other aren't like that C and CLA class models are more like any other regular car with a nicer interior and maybe a better suspension, but at the end they even Renault engines (that aren't so well made), so they aren't so great than older versions. All of this is AFAIK, so please correct me if there is any mistake.
- science4sail 5y ago
  Like a corporate version of the rise and fall of civilizations? > [Ibn Khaldun] explains that ruling houses tend to emerge on the peripheries of existing empires and use the much stronger asabiyya present in their areas to their advantage, in order to bring about a change in leadership. This implies that the new rulers are at first considered 'barbarians' in comparison to the previous ones. As they establish themselves at the center of their empire, they become increasingly lax, less coordinated, disciplined and watchful, and more concerned with maintaining their new power and lifestyle. Their asabiyya dissolves into factionalism and individualism, diminishing their capacity as a political unit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asabiyyah https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asabiyyah
- jimbilly22 5y ago
  it is, generally, yes. But what shapes companies in the long-term is the degree in which they can stem this natural tendency. I.E. Amazon vs Kodak. Blockbuster vs Best Buy
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

ChuckNorris89 5y ago

Isn't this what inevitably happens to all companies eventually? You have a group of enthusiastic founders who make it big through smarts, passion and dedication and after a couple of decades, they retire, and the company is now mostly formed of people who are in just to cash in on the money and fame from having that brand name on their resume as people who are as smart, passionate and dedicated as the original founders were would most likely work on their own idea rather than said famous company. On the tech circles online Google is known for being the place where you grind leet-code to get in so you can make big $ and coast (rest and vest), not break your back working on fancy world changing ideas. The latter is for start-ups. Apple was ahead of the game too as they had the visionary Steve Jobs at the helm, while now, sure their stock is as high as ever and their M1 macs are great but you don't really see people queuing up for days in front of their shops anymore since their post-Jobs strategy has been less about disruptive innovation and more about entrenching and expanding their existing positions by leveraging their supply chain prowess.

oblio 5y ago
https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2001/01/18/big-macs-vs-the-naked-chef/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2001/01/18/big-macs-vs-the-na... > Summary, so far: > Some things need talent to do really well. > It’s hard to scale talent. > One way people try to scale talent is by having the talent create rules for the untalented to follow. > The quality of the resulting product is very low.
regularfry 5y ago
Not just companies. Reversion to the mean is ubiquitous.
aqsalose 5y ago
I think Mercedes is still Mercedes of cars?
- ChuckNorris89 5y ago
  Not in Europe. Mercedes was the Mercedes of cars when the S-Class was the pinnacle of automotive technology and only the rich and famous could afford them so they also had exclusivity going for them. Nowadays, the S-Class is no longer nexus tech and thanks to cheap credit and rock bottom devaluation on the second hand market, they're not at all exclusive that even in the poorer parts of town where I live, there are lots of Mercedes and in Germany they're used as taxis.
  - dekhn 5y ago
    mercedes were used as taxis when I visited germany.... 30 years ago.
- jmrm 5y ago
  The most important models, like the S class, the G class, and the AMG GT, still are the top notch in quality, quirks, and performance, but the other aren't like that C and CLA class models are more like any other regular car with a nicer interior and maybe a better suspension, but at the end they even Renault engines (that aren't so well made), so they aren't so great than older versions. All of this is AFAIK, so please correct me if there is any mistake.
science4sail 5y ago
Like a corporate version of the rise and fall of civilizations? > [Ibn Khaldun] explains that ruling houses tend to emerge on the peripheries of existing empires and use the much stronger asabiyya present in their areas to their advantage, in order to bring about a change in leadership. This implies that the new rulers are at first considered 'barbarians' in comparison to the previous ones. As they establish themselves at the center of their empire, they become increasingly lax, less coordinated, disciplined and watchful, and more concerned with maintaining their new power and lifestyle. Their asabiyya dissolves into factionalism and individualism, diminishing their capacity as a political unit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asabiyyah https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asabiyyah
jimbilly22 5y ago
it is, generally, yes. But what shapes companies in the long-term is the degree in which they can stem this natural tendency. I.E. Amazon vs Kodak. Blockbuster vs Best Buy
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]