5 ms·
Killing random mergers for no reason, is killing the only exit left for many companies (the IPO door is closed now). That is massively anti-startup in my book.
by IG_Semmelweiss 3y ago
Killing random mergers for no reason, is killing the only exit left for many companies (the IPO door is closed now).
That is massively anti-startup in my book.
- mcpackieh 3y agoMaybe companies should try being profitable instead of being acquisition bait.
- IG_Semmelweiss 3y agoThats a strange take. Time is money. Thats why lottery winners often take a lump sum payment instead of an annuity. There is nothing wrong with cashing in your chips now vs gambling your winnings for an uncertain future.
- mcpackieh 3y agoI'm not saying a company should never be permitted to accept an acquisition offer. I'm just saying that getting acquired shouldn't be Plan A or their "only exit" as you put it. They should foremost try to make it as their own company, and if that was never going to be feasible for them, then maybe society is better off without that sort of company in the first place.
- refurb 3y agoThis comment seems to ignore a huge part of the start-up ecosystem and seems like a great recipe for stiffling innovative, not increasing it.
- uoaei 3y ago> random mergers for no reason > only exit left for many companies Quite the injection of hardline ideology in what was otherwise a rather reasoned discussion on economics in the real world.