3 ms·
Was This $100B Deal the Worst Merger Ever?
- amadeuspagel 4y agoDidn't Time Warner merge with AOL before and wasn't that also a disaster? Why does this keep happening? Another example from the NYT comment section: > I worked at the original AT&T for many years. At that point AT&T decided to buy several Cable companies for $50 Billion, only to fail miserably and sell them a few years later for far less, erasing some $25 Billion in shareholder value. For years I told this story of how the CEO, since replaced years ago, lost more money that any other employee. Sadly the latest effort by AT&T tops that. How sad. Why? Why do tech companies like AOL and AT&T keep buying and fucking up media companies? Is it just political influence? Cultural influence? Hanging out with celebrities?
- bediger4000 4y agoBear in mind that the current AT&T isn't the old one. This AT&T is essentially Southwest Bell trying to put the monopoly back together. The old AT&T foundered probably on not keeping their tech up to date, they were not even able to cope with the introduction of number portability. That's probably a simplistic take, but I think mostly true. Current AT&T will make terrible mistakes because of different internal politics.
- ratg13 4y agoMy vote would still go to the McDonnell Douglas / Boeing merger. Not only was the merger itself terrible, but you could make the argument that it indirectly killed many people. https://qz.com/1776080/how-the-mcdonnell-douglas-boeing-merger-led-to-the-737-max-crisis https://qz.com/1776080/how-the-mcdonnell-douglas-boeing-merg...