3 ms·
> "it's not worth voting unless my vote is specifically the one that changes the outcome" I think that's a bad comparison - it implies the outcome would have b
by gurkendoktor 14y ago
> "it's not worth voting unless my vote is specifically the one that changes the outcome"
I think that's a bad comparison - it implies the outcome would have been different if everyone voted with their wallets. Yet a saturated market would increase the odds of an acquihire.
- chernevik 14y agoIf _everyone_ had bought Sparrow, they would have had enormously larger revenues. Almost as important, they would have had much greater certainty in some portion of future revenues. That certainty is economically important, one reason for taking a chunk of Google Cash is checking off the 'funded retirement', 'funded kids college', 'bought house' items off the to-do list. They also would have been more likely to attract investment for development without a big partner. They might still see reasons for joining Google, but financial security and investment would have been less important.