4 ms·
It's DAU getting companies like this into over-leveraging, and it's a bubble we're still in. Good tech products are not necessarily capital/personnel intensive.
by meltyness 4y ago
It's DAU getting companies like this into over-leveraging, and it's a bubble we're still in. Good tech products are not necessarily capital/personnel intensive.
The "finish line" for Google is not the next Search, or real innovation, it is about longevity, maintaining an ecosystem, and "trading the news."
- Windows applications are risky, and inflexible -- Chrome.
- Laptops and Active Directory confusing ISD administrators -- Chromebook/Workspaces ecosystem.
- TikTok is getting a bad rap on the hill -- Shorts.
These are healthy and understandable business moves, but not everything these companies excrete is, good.
This is where buybacks should be terminated by our legislators. Not to punish these players for their rapid success, but to facilitate natural logistics for these hugely impactful, ubiquitouly embedded service providers.
On the less sane side of things:
- Google Wave beat Slack/Teams/Discord to market by 10 years.
- Google+ was 7-8 years late to the party.
- Stadia, obviously at-odds with AR/VR, and Deep ML.
- The only way to prevent "20% time" from hacking away at your own "terra firma" is to punish it, or make it impossible -- overhire and waste your employees time.
- travisjungroth 4y ago> but to facilitate natural logistics for these hugely impactful, ubiquitouly embedded service providers. What does this mean?
- meltyness 4y agoI'm avoiding the term "leverage", and the huge issuances it must have taken to make a Stadia appear, and then suddenly disappear, as well as "the bottom 6%" that appeared and disappeared from the roster over the course of 2022. Economically speaking, where's the logistic growth peak? Is there growth for each company each business cycle? I don't know that, but in my opinion, the dividend-buyback axis is how FAANG companies got themselves in this "unconstrained, risk-free market participant" position in the first place. In one sense, buying everyone in the world a graphics card is a cool idea. In another sense, it's extremely risky and probably wasteful. Similar to "Bird" but somehow less noble. The slime mold only creeps if there's no environmental constraints.
- travisjungroth 4y agoYeah I still don’t really understand lol. Buybacks are equivalent in effect to dividends except tax implications and small details. You didn’t mention those but did mention buyback dividend axis so I’m taking it you think dividends should be outlawed as well. I’m not sure the stock market would function if that was the case.
- meltyness 4y agoBuybacks create false value, dividends redistribute value. Buybacks would be equivalent to dividends if there was 100% consensus that the company's market value was headed up, faster than any other asset -- such that all recipients started trying to buyout others.
- wombatpm 4y agoWith a dividend I get income and still own the stock. With a buy back I have to sell to see my money. Not the same
- travisjungroth 4y agoWith a buyback your percent ownership goes up. You can sell stock to maintain the same percentage but get cash.