4 ms·

This feels like a wilful misunderstanding. FB doesn't claim selling the company is the only reason to start one. But it is a top 3 "exit strategy" for startup

This feels like a wilful misunderstanding. FB doesn't claim selling the company is the only reason to start one. But it is a top 3 "exit strategy" for startups, so limiting it would have a chilling effect on startup formation. How big that effect would be is probably a better avenue for counter arguments.

djbusby 5y ago
Where is the limit though? There are literally 1000s of other places to sell the company. It's only blocking one HUGE company from this one deal.
- jonas21 5y ago
  Do you have a few examples of those other places? I'd imagine that anyone interested in buying Giphy would fall into one of two categories: 1. Large tech companies for which the same antitrust arguments would apply. 2. Companies that can't afford to pay anywhere near $400M for a GIF sharing service.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - Apocryphon 5y ago
    Imgur? Reddit?
    - fuzzer37 5y ago
      > Imgur? Reddit? Both of which fall under arguments 1 and 2
  - legostormtroopr 5y ago
    > Companies that can't afford to pay anywhere near $400M for a GIF sharing service What makes a free GIF sharing service worth $400M dollars - apart from the data harvesting Facebook can do to better target users with ads. We don't need to outlaw these sales, just outlaw the integration of data from purchased services, and then you'll see what the true value of the company is.
kranke155 5y ago
Of course it is a blatant lie just like almost everything they say now. Giphy is free to sell itself to almost any other company on Earth except FB. This has no chilling effect whatsoever
- jensensbutton 5y ago
  Name another company that wants to buy it.
  - kranke155 5y ago
    It’s not the regulator’s job to find other buyers for Gyphy. There’s a million companies who could buy it, doesn’t mean they will. But the goal here from FB is clearly to monopolise data aggregation, which regulators rightly have to stop.
  - sophacles 5y ago
    Good point, it's almost as if allowing large monopolists to have their way has a chilling effect on people wanting to compete with them.
amyjess 5y ago
> limiting it would have a chilling effect on startup formation I'm okay with that. Startup culture is toxic, and the world would be a much better place if the only legal reason to found a business would be to make a steady profit selling your product. If your company only exists so you can sell it (as in the company as a whole) to someone else, your company shouldn't exist.

djbusby 5y ago

Where is the limit though? There are literally 1000s of other places to sell the company. It's only blocking one HUGE company from this one deal.

jonas21 5y ago
Do you have a few examples of those other places? I'd imagine that anyone interested in buying Giphy would fall into one of two categories: 1. Large tech companies for which the same antitrust arguments would apply. 2. Companies that can't afford to pay anywhere near $400M for a GIF sharing service.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- Apocryphon 5y ago
  Imgur? Reddit?
  - fuzzer37 5y ago
    > Imgur? Reddit? Both of which fall under arguments 1 and 2
- legostormtroopr 5y ago
  > Companies that can't afford to pay anywhere near $400M for a GIF sharing service What makes a free GIF sharing service worth $400M dollars - apart from the data harvesting Facebook can do to better target users with ads. We don't need to outlaw these sales, just outlaw the integration of data from purchased services, and then you'll see what the true value of the company is.

kranke155 5y ago

Of course it is a blatant lie just like almost everything they say now. Giphy is free to sell itself to almost any other company on Earth except FB. This has no chilling effect whatsoever

jensensbutton 5y ago
Name another company that wants to buy it.
- kranke155 5y ago
  It’s not the regulator’s job to find other buyers for Gyphy. There’s a million companies who could buy it, doesn’t mean they will. But the goal here from FB is clearly to monopolise data aggregation, which regulators rightly have to stop.
- sophacles 5y ago
  Good point, it's almost as if allowing large monopolists to have their way has a chilling effect on people wanting to compete with them.

amyjess 5y ago

> limiting it would have a chilling effect on startup formation I'm okay with that. Startup culture is toxic, and the world would be a much better place if the only legal reason to found a business would be to make a steady profit selling your product. If your company only exists so you can sell it (as in the company as a whole) to someone else, your company shouldn't exist.