2 ms·

Would it be worthwhile for Walmart to pay, for example, $20bn to Amazon (and $200m to the government) to force Amazon to rebrand? I think that's probably a yes.

eru 4y ago
Why wouldn't Amazon just bid higher?
- onion2k 4y ago
  The OP suggests a sealed bid auction. That means they wouldn't know how much other parties have bid. There would be no way to guarantee they've put in the highest bid.
  - eru 4y ago
    In a sealed bid, second price auction, Amazon could just bid approximately infinity every time, and only pay the second highest bid. (Presumably, they wouldn't actually bid infinity, just in case someone else bids infinity-1 as a joke. But they could afford to bid what the Amazon brand is actually worth to them.)
diffeomorphism 4y ago
That only tells you that it should be worth more than $200m to Amazon that this does not happen. That is nothing different than a yearly tax on holding a trademark. There the obvious issue is that companies can just lie to pay less taxes. Easy solution: let the market decide. You say it is worth X -> If that number is right you should be more than happy to sell for 100X. If you are not happy to sell for that, that means you cheated on your tax. Inb4: But then big companies can just buy you for 100 times your value. ... yeah, and? That is already the case and for many companies (e.g. all of ycombinator funded startups) that is even a goal.
HWR_14 4y ago
I'm not worried about Amazon in such a system (although I can see Amazon trying to buy the name Disney or Walmart). But imagine the startup offered the choice of selling out at a steep discount or having their runway consumed defending the trademark or starting over with a new name. Oculus does well on Kickstarter and has some buzz? Why acquire it when FB can just buy the name and goodwill for a fraction of the cost?

eru 4y ago

Why wouldn't Amazon just bid higher?

onion2k 4y ago
The OP suggests a sealed bid auction. That means they wouldn't know how much other parties have bid. There would be no way to guarantee they've put in the highest bid.
- eru 4y ago
  In a sealed bid, second price auction, Amazon could just bid approximately infinity every time, and only pay the second highest bid. (Presumably, they wouldn't actually bid infinity, just in case someone else bids infinity-1 as a joke. But they could afford to bid what the Amazon brand is actually worth to them.)

diffeomorphism 4y ago

That only tells you that it should be worth more than $200m to Amazon that this does not happen. That is nothing different than a yearly tax on holding a trademark. There the obvious issue is that companies can just lie to pay less taxes. Easy solution: let the market decide. You say it is worth X -> If that number is right you should be more than happy to sell for 100X. If you are not happy to sell for that, that means you cheated on your tax. Inb4: But then big companies can just buy you for 100 times your value. ... yeah, and? That is already the case and for many companies (e.g. all of ycombinator funded startups) that is even a goal.

HWR_14 4y ago

I'm not worried about Amazon in such a system (although I can see Amazon trying to buy the name Disney or Walmart). But imagine the startup offered the choice of selling out at a steep discount or having their runway consumed defending the trademark or starting over with a new name. Oculus does well on Kickstarter and has some buzz? Why acquire it when FB can just buy the name and goodwill for a fraction of the cost?