3 ms·

If I'm understanding it correctly, the assertion is that Apple feigned interest in collaboration as a pretext to put themselves in a position to hire away emplo

If I'm understanding it correctly, the assertion is that Apple feigned interest in collaboration as a pretext to put themselves in a position to hire away employees. If that's true, then it's certainly dishonest even if it isn't illegal. It could also be concerning if large companies can smother smaller competitors in the cradle.

m3kw9 3y ago
This happens all the time, imagine every deal goes thru, it doesn’t, and there will be meetings. Could be that their asking price was too high and it went thru and Apple hires some of them instead(legally), but the employees was dumb enough to use their knowledge of their previous product too much
Someone 3y ago
> the assertion is that Apple feigned interest in collaboration as a pretext to put themselves in a position to hire away employees If that was their plan, and they weren’t stupid, that will be extremely hard to prove. Reason: if their plan was “we want to have this tech” and started talks in good faith that led nowhere, the same easily could have happened. It’s a standard negotiation tactic to let ‘them’ know/think that you have alternatives, so during negotiations, Apple may have hinted that they would do it themselves if negotiations broke down, with the side effect of informing personnel of Masimo that opportunities might become available if negotiations broke down. If, after negotiations broke down, Apple really decided “let’s do it ourselves” and put up job descriptions, I don’t think they’d have to explicitly call Masimo personnel to apply for those jobs, as they’ll know there are good career opportunities there. > It could also be concerning if large companies can smother smaller competitors in the cradle. I think that’s unavoidable. If SmallCo has a feature in their product that BigCo doesn’t have, commenters will deride them for it. If they add it in basic form, commenters will also deride them for it, and if they add it in superior form, commenters will also deride them for it, calling it Sherlocking. The only way to prevent that would be to pay SmallCo for permission to clone the feature. If SmallCo, knowing that, sets an unrealistic price, what can BigCo do, other than ending negotiations and building the feature themselves? If they don’t build it at, commenters will deride them for it, so that’s not an option.
- iudqnolq 3y ago
  Why speculate in the abstract when this is the subject of the recent court case and ITC decision?
  - threeseed 3y ago
    Because it is an unproven allegation made by Masimo. I am also confused why Apple would go to these sort of lengths for recruitment. The company has acquired dozens of similar sized companies in the past so it is likely that the deal simply fell through.
    - justinclift 3y ago
      > it is an unproven allegation Unless I'm misunderstanding the article, it seems like several trials have been conducted over this with Masimo being the winner multiple times. Doesn't sound all that "unproven", thus far anyway.
    - Beldin 3y ago
      Conversely, Apple has the cash on hand to buy most companies and not even notice a drop in cash in hand. Plus they buy companies all the time... but this once, they didn't -- but hired 20 people from there. In other words, the fact that it is normal for them to behave differently is at least as damning is it is exculpating.
  - pavon 3y ago
    The ITC ruled only on patent infringement, which isn't the subject of the post.
crazygringo 3y ago
Apple doesn't need to feign interest to hire away employees, it doesn't need to put itself in any kind of "position". It literally just has to create job openings and have its recruiters reach out the employees with attractive offers. And there's nothing dishonest about that whatsoever. As I mentioned in another comment, Masimo had revenue of $1.24 billion last year. They're not a tiny mom and pop company. It's their job to pay their talent enough, and treat them well enough, so that they stay. If they fail to do so, then that's on them. (And of course, companies undervalue their employees all the time. It's why the best way to progress in your career is often to be constantly switching companies, because another company will pay you what you're worth when your present company refuses.)
- echelon 3y ago
  Apple is walking antitrust case. Apple should know better than to use its weight to tear the flesh off of small players in new markets. This isn't innovation - this is pouring unrelated economic gains from one economy into a completely different market segment. It's wholly and utterly unfair. A watch company should not be a movie studio. A movie studio should not be a grocery store. A search engine paying for 100% placement should not also be a music platform, movie platform, thermostat vendor, cloud vendor, ... This is all levels of fucked. The government needs to break these obese mafia companies apart. It'll be better for competition and the consumer. Fair competition would help more rewards flow directly to innovators. Instead, these Megatech companies staffed with their reams of PMs grow like a blob [1, 2] into anything that pops up on their radar. [1] actually a great analogy for these companies; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blob https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blob [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blob_(1988_film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blob_(1988_film)
  - sangnoir 3y ago
    > Apple should know better than to use its weight to tear the flesh off of small players in new markets ...but that's where the profits are. Apple, like Walmart and big-hair rock bands back in the day, thrive by throwing its weight around and taking advantage of small-time suppliers (or groupies) who'd do anything to get a shot at the bug leagues - including shouldering disproportionate risks for an illusory union used to string them along.

m3kw9 3y ago

This happens all the time, imagine every deal goes thru, it doesn’t, and there will be meetings. Could be that their asking price was too high and it went thru and Apple hires some of them instead(legally), but the employees was dumb enough to use their knowledge of their previous product too much

Someone 3y ago

> the assertion is that Apple feigned interest in collaboration as a pretext to put themselves in a position to hire away employees If that was their plan, and they weren’t stupid, that will be extremely hard to prove. Reason: if their plan was “we want to have this tech” and started talks in good faith that led nowhere, the same easily could have happened. It’s a standard negotiation tactic to let ‘them’ know/think that you have alternatives, so during negotiations, Apple may have hinted that they would do it themselves if negotiations broke down, with the side effect of informing personnel of Masimo that opportunities might become available if negotiations broke down. If, after negotiations broke down, Apple really decided “let’s do it ourselves” and put up job descriptions, I don’t think they’d have to explicitly call Masimo personnel to apply for those jobs, as they’ll know there are good career opportunities there. > It could also be concerning if large companies can smother smaller competitors in the cradle. I think that’s unavoidable. If SmallCo has a feature in their product that BigCo doesn’t have, commenters will deride them for it. If they add it in basic form, commenters will also deride them for it, and if they add it in superior form, commenters will also deride them for it, calling it Sherlocking. The only way to prevent that would be to pay SmallCo for permission to clone the feature. If SmallCo, knowing that, sets an unrealistic price, what can BigCo do, other than ending negotiations and building the feature themselves? If they don’t build it at, commenters will deride them for it, so that’s not an option.

iudqnolq 3y ago
Why speculate in the abstract when this is the subject of the recent court case and ITC decision?
- threeseed 3y ago
  Because it is an unproven allegation made by Masimo. I am also confused why Apple would go to these sort of lengths for recruitment. The company has acquired dozens of similar sized companies in the past so it is likely that the deal simply fell through.
  - justinclift 3y ago
    > it is an unproven allegation Unless I'm misunderstanding the article, it seems like several trials have been conducted over this with Masimo being the winner multiple times. Doesn't sound all that "unproven", thus far anyway.
  - Beldin 3y ago
    Conversely, Apple has the cash on hand to buy most companies and not even notice a drop in cash in hand. Plus they buy companies all the time... but this once, they didn't -- but hired 20 people from there. In other words, the fact that it is normal for them to behave differently is at least as damning is it is exculpating.
- pavon 3y ago
  The ITC ruled only on patent infringement, which isn't the subject of the post.

crazygringo 3y ago

Apple doesn't need to feign interest to hire away employees, it doesn't need to put itself in any kind of "position". It literally just has to create job openings and have its recruiters reach out the employees with attractive offers. And there's nothing dishonest about that whatsoever. As I mentioned in another comment, Masimo had revenue of $1.24 billion last year. They're not a tiny mom and pop company. It's their job to pay their talent enough, and treat them well enough, so that they stay. If they fail to do so, then that's on them. (And of course, companies undervalue their employees all the time. It's why the best way to progress in your career is often to be constantly switching companies, because another company will pay you what you're worth when your present company refuses.)

echelon 3y ago
Apple is walking antitrust case. Apple should know better than to use its weight to tear the flesh off of small players in new markets. This isn't innovation - this is pouring unrelated economic gains from one economy into a completely different market segment. It's wholly and utterly unfair. A watch company should not be a movie studio. A movie studio should not be a grocery store. A search engine paying for 100% placement should not also be a music platform, movie platform, thermostat vendor, cloud vendor, ... This is all levels of fucked. The government needs to break these obese mafia companies apart. It'll be better for competition and the consumer. Fair competition would help more rewards flow directly to innovators. Instead, these Megatech companies staffed with their reams of PMs grow like a blob [1, 2] into anything that pops up on their radar. [1] actually a great analogy for these companies; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blob https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blob [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blob_(1988_film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blob_(1988_film)
- sangnoir 3y ago
  > Apple should know better than to use its weight to tear the flesh off of small players in new markets ...but that's where the profits are. Apple, like Walmart and big-hair rock bands back in the day, thrive by throwing its weight around and taking advantage of small-time suppliers (or groupies) who'd do anything to get a shot at the bug leagues - including shouldering disproportionate risks for an illusory union used to string them along.