2 ms·

>Only way Adobe could justify this is that it kills a dangerous competitor, which is what EU legislation is supposed to stop.. I mean, that's exactly what my p

>Only way Adobe could justify this is that it kills a dangerous competitor, which is what EU legislation is supposed to stop.. I mean, that's exactly what my post above is saying. Figma has inherent tech advantages via their cloud-native stack. You can use the tools anywhere there is a browser. It's significantly more intuitive and easier to collaborate with multiple people. Their applications can eventually be accelerated server side such as GPU-farm acceleration for AI features. Figma is also building a community for sharing work, like the Github of design. There's nothing really stopping Figma from creating a competitor to Adobe Cloud Suite including Photoshop, Illustrator, Acrobat, and InDesign.

qwytw 3y ago
Yes, but there is no way it would cost Adobe even close to $20 billion to develop an analogues product. Well you said: > This means Adobe might actually have to pay a little bit more for Figma if they acquired them now. Which is very unlikely in the current market if they were a public company.
- senttoschool 3y ago
  >Yes, but there is no way it would cost Adobe even close to $20 billion to develop an analogues product. This, I'm not familiar with. However, I will say that time to market is important too. By the time Adobe can come up with a cloud-native competitor to Figma, Figma might have come up with a cloud-native competitors to Photoshop and Illustrator. >Which is very unlikely in the current market if they were a public company. Why not? Nasdaq is 13% higher today than in September 2022 when they announced the deal. Adobe itself is 25% higher now. Arguably, tech valuations have stabilized and increasing again.
  - qwytw 3y ago
    Because a 50 P/S ratio would be unusually high (I'm of course trying to say that IMHO Adobe is significantly overpaying) Figma is a private company, of course it depends on figures as well which are not publicly available but no comparable public companies are valued that high after the 2021 peak. However unlike most comparable tech companies it is supposedly profitable (not clear if GAAP, though) which would increase it's valuation.

qwytw 3y ago

Yes, but there is no way it would cost Adobe even close to $20 billion to develop an analogues product. Well you said: > This means Adobe might actually have to pay a little bit more for Figma if they acquired them now. Which is very unlikely in the current market if they were a public company.

senttoschool 3y ago
>Yes, but there is no way it would cost Adobe even close to $20 billion to develop an analogues product. This, I'm not familiar with. However, I will say that time to market is important too. By the time Adobe can come up with a cloud-native competitor to Figma, Figma might have come up with a cloud-native competitors to Photoshop and Illustrator. >Which is very unlikely in the current market if they were a public company. Why not? Nasdaq is 13% higher today than in September 2022 when they announced the deal. Adobe itself is 25% higher now. Arguably, tech valuations have stabilized and increasing again.
- qwytw 3y ago
  Because a 50 P/S ratio would be unusually high (I'm of course trying to say that IMHO Adobe is significantly overpaying) Figma is a private company, of course it depends on figures as well which are not publicly available but no comparable public companies are valued that high after the 2021 peak. However unlike most comparable tech companies it is supposedly profitable (not clear if GAAP, though) which would increase it's valuation.