2 ms·
This is actually a distinction without difference What you describe is HOW Goog etc... unseated the majors. Namely that those other companies couldn't adjust f
by AndrewKemendo 5y ago
This is actually a distinction without difference
What you describe is HOW Goog etc... unseated the majors. Namely that those other companies couldn't adjust fast enough to absorb those new and fast growing markets.
While we could argue whether or not FAAMG is great at executing on attempts to follow emerging markets, I think it's indisputable that they have the resources and nibleness to either absorb via acquisition, take significant positions in (via venture funds) or kill any emerging markets that would actually replace their market positions.
I argue that there exist no emerging markets where the top players couldn't collectively come in and replace/kill the new entrants.
- bpodgursky 5y ago> I think it's indisputable that they have the resources and nibleness to either absorb via acquisition, take significant positions in (via venture funds) or kill any emerging markets that would actually replace their market positions. If the answer is (1) acquisition, that's a good reason to invest in the companies attempting to disrupt the space -- you're making the incumbents pay for that monopoly status. Even if they aren't disrupted, you're profiting from their anti-competitive behavior.