3 ms·

Yes you can stretch anything to fit a narrative. Amazon runs the platform that sells everything so they shouldn’t be allowed to buy anything.

shakes_mcjunkie 4y ago
Not a bad idea
killyourcar 4y ago
It's not stretching the narrative at all, this is exactly how the executives think at Amazon. Everything must be connected and used to showcase the other parts of the business.
dd36 4y ago
The incentives become perverse once relatively unrelated businesses are combined. History also shows conglomerates don’t out perform the stand alone companies and it hurts competition and innovation. I think there’s a certain point where executives run out of ideas but have to be doing something. Then you have investment bankers and advisors pushing these ideas and copycatting each other for that sweet, sweet commission payday. And it’s not so much that these are great ideas, it’s can they sound okay enough to get that payday before everyone realizes it was all a stupid waste of time five years later. That is, after the acquired company gets its souls sucked out, the talent leaves, and the acquirer discards the husk at a discount.
- stickfigure 4y ago
  > History also shows conglomerates don’t out perform the stand alone companies This is a self-correcting phenomenon.
  - ElevenLathe 4y ago
    It self-corrects on generational timescales, which is arguably not good enough. The last "fad" of conglomeration happened in the "go go years", and a generation of business and finance types learned it was a bad idea. Now those people are all retired and a new generation is learning the lesson.
InsomniacL 4y ago
> Amazon runs the platform that sells everything so they shouldn’t be allowed to buy anything. The issue isn't Amazon buying something. The issue is Amazon buying something to force them to use their services hence circumventing competition. EA may previously have used GCP to host their services because they provide a better service and are cheaper. This forces AWS to do better to compete against GCP and the end-consumer purchasing the game will pay less.

shakes_mcjunkie 4y ago

Not a bad idea

killyourcar 4y ago

It's not stretching the narrative at all, this is exactly how the executives think at Amazon. Everything must be connected and used to showcase the other parts of the business.

dd36 4y ago

The incentives become perverse once relatively unrelated businesses are combined. History also shows conglomerates don’t out perform the stand alone companies and it hurts competition and innovation. I think there’s a certain point where executives run out of ideas but have to be doing something. Then you have investment bankers and advisors pushing these ideas and copycatting each other for that sweet, sweet commission payday. And it’s not so much that these are great ideas, it’s can they sound okay enough to get that payday before everyone realizes it was all a stupid waste of time five years later. That is, after the acquired company gets its souls sucked out, the talent leaves, and the acquirer discards the husk at a discount.

stickfigure 4y ago
> History also shows conglomerates don’t out perform the stand alone companies This is a self-correcting phenomenon.
- ElevenLathe 4y ago
  It self-corrects on generational timescales, which is arguably not good enough. The last "fad" of conglomeration happened in the "go go years", and a generation of business and finance types learned it was a bad idea. Now those people are all retired and a new generation is learning the lesson.

InsomniacL 4y ago

> Amazon runs the platform that sells everything so they shouldn’t be allowed to buy anything. The issue isn't Amazon buying something. The issue is Amazon buying something to force them to use their services hence circumventing competition. EA may previously have used GCP to host their services because they provide a better service and are cheaper. This forces AWS to do better to compete against GCP and the end-consumer purchasing the game will pay less.