If Activision gets scrubbed it would likely be because Microsoft is consolidating companies in one industry, namely video games, especially with the weight ABK has. Acquiring Netflix would...
If Activision gets scrubbed it would likely be because Microsoft is consolidating companies in one industry, namely video games, especially with the weight ABK has.
Acquiring Netflix would technically be expansion into a different industry, and not subject to the same scrutiny.
Always drives me batty that this is seen as OK, especially when company in question is a multi-billion dollar megacorp. How many smaller businesses need to die at the alter of the Tech Gods before...
Always drives me batty that this is seen as OK, especially when company in question is a multi-billion dollar megacorp.
How many smaller businesses need to die at the alter of the Tech Gods before we take a stand to say 'no your company is large enough, you're not allowed to buy your way into another market'?
Being large on it's own doesn't seem like much of a problem. If they are providing a good service there is no issue. Once they start using their power against consumers, then governments can step...
Being large on it's own doesn't seem like much of a problem. If they are providing a good service there is no issue. Once they start using their power against consumers, then governments can step in. Like how Apple has been required to allow alt app stores and use USB-C.
The larger the company, the more power they have. The more power they have, the more influence they can exert in various areas, like law. And over time public companies will always favor profits...
The larger the company, the more power they have. The more power they have, the more influence they can exert in various areas, like law. And over time public companies will always favor profits over consumers.
The larger and broader a company's product line, the harder for meaningful competitors to crop up. Because if nothing else, the incumbant can leverage other profitable areas to sustain below-cost operation in a target market until its competition runs out of money.
Apple is the largest company in the world and we can see they are still able to be controlled by the government as long as the general public sides with the government on the topic. So at this...
Apple is the largest company in the world and we can see they are still able to be controlled by the government as long as the general public sides with the government on the topic. So at this point no company is unable to be regulated when they try anti consumer actions.
In theory yes. But in practice these regulations are often too little too late. It's because we make excuses for tech giants allowing them to grow infinitely huge to the point competitors need to...
In theory yes. But in practice these regulations are often too little too late. It's because we make excuses for tech giants allowing them to grow infinitely huge to the point competitors need to be equally huge.
So you get oligopolies and the best bit players can hope for is to be disruptive enough to get a buyout offer.
We need preventative antitrust, not punitive. Large companies need to prove their worth beyond knowing which other companies to consume.
You'll notice while the EU is relatively consumer friendly, the USA is not. And it's because money talks.
It is a problem in that it stifles innovation. Imagine a society in future where the sole ambition of every techie is to just join one of these big techs and be a worker there (probably already...
Being large on it's own doesn't seem like much of a problem
It is a problem in that it stifles innovation. Imagine a society in future where the sole ambition of every techie is to just join one of these big techs and be a worker there (probably already happening?). Nobody will try to innovate or be an entrepreneur themselves, and we already know how the track record in innovation is of these big techs. In other words, there will be dual problems of youth not having entrepreneurship spirit or risk taking ability, and society lacking innovation.
I'm a huge fan of Adam Smith capitalism which thrives on good and healthy competition but what's going on here is probably the opposite of that.
Microsoft does have a massive gaming division. It's fairly obvious to see how purchasing one of the largest other developers gives them an unprecedented wedge to drive out Sony/Nintendo/etc. But...
Microsoft does have a massive gaming division. It's fairly obvious to see how purchasing one of the largest other developers gives them an unprecedented wedge to drive out Sony/Nintendo/etc.
But Microsoft does not (to my knowledge) have a streaming platform/production company. So they're new entrants in the market. Apple is doing it, so obviously it's OK for Microsoft to.
If this comes to pass I'm killing my Netflix sub, which I've had from their first DVD days. I'll be sad to see it go. I already begrudgingly give too much to Microsoft, I'll be damned if they'll keep my $15/mo.
This is a rumor though on both sides, nobody is being quoted as wanting to buy or sell, and it's explicitly a prediction as opposed to a rumor or a person familiar with the matter.
This is a rumor though on both sides, nobody is being quoted as wanting to buy or sell, and it's explicitly a prediction as opposed to a rumor or a person familiar with the matter.
This does not negate my point. A Netflix aquisition is unlikely to be blocked, even if its just rumor and theory right now. If Netflix does engage with a Microsoft buyout, my sub drops.
This does not negate my point. A Netflix aquisition is unlikely to be blocked, even if its just rumor and theory right now.
If Netflix does engage with a Microsoft buyout, my sub drops.
If the Activision buyout gets scrubbed, how would a Netflix purchase go through?
If Activision gets scrubbed it would likely be because Microsoft is consolidating companies in one industry, namely video games, especially with the weight ABK has.
Acquiring Netflix would technically be expansion into a different industry, and not subject to the same scrutiny.
Always drives me batty that this is seen as OK, especially when company in question is a multi-billion dollar megacorp.
How many smaller businesses need to die at the alter of the Tech Gods before we take a stand to say 'no your company is large enough, you're not allowed to buy your way into another market'?
Being large on it's own doesn't seem like much of a problem. If they are providing a good service there is no issue. Once they start using their power against consumers, then governments can step in. Like how Apple has been required to allow alt app stores and use USB-C.
The larger the company, the more power they have. The more power they have, the more influence they can exert in various areas, like law. And over time public companies will always favor profits over consumers.
The larger and broader a company's product line, the harder for meaningful competitors to crop up. Because if nothing else, the incumbant can leverage other profitable areas to sustain below-cost operation in a target market until its competition runs out of money.
Apple is the largest company in the world and we can see they are still able to be controlled by the government as long as the general public sides with the government on the topic. So at this point no company is unable to be regulated when they try anti consumer actions.
In theory yes. But in practice these regulations are often too little too late. It's because we make excuses for tech giants allowing them to grow infinitely huge to the point competitors need to be equally huge.
So you get oligopolies and the best bit players can hope for is to be disruptive enough to get a buyout offer.
We need preventative antitrust, not punitive. Large companies need to prove their worth beyond knowing which other companies to consume.
You'll notice while the EU is relatively consumer friendly, the USA is not. And it's because money talks.
It is a problem in that it stifles innovation. Imagine a society in future where the sole ambition of every techie is to just join one of these big techs and be a worker there (probably already happening?). Nobody will try to innovate or be an entrepreneur themselves, and we already know how the track record in innovation is of these big techs. In other words, there will be dual problems of youth not having entrepreneurship spirit or risk taking ability, and society lacking innovation.
I'm a huge fan of Adam Smith capitalism which thrives on good and healthy competition but what's going on here is probably the opposite of that.
Microsoft does have a massive gaming division. It's fairly obvious to see how purchasing one of the largest other developers gives them an unprecedented wedge to drive out Sony/Nintendo/etc.
But Microsoft does not (to my knowledge) have a streaming platform/production company. So they're new entrants in the market. Apple is doing it, so obviously it's OK for Microsoft to.
If this comes to pass I'm killing my Netflix sub, which I've had from their first DVD days. I'll be sad to see it go. I already begrudgingly give too much to Microsoft, I'll be damned if they'll keep my $15/mo.
This is a rumor though on both sides, nobody is being quoted as wanting to buy or sell, and it's explicitly a prediction as opposed to a rumor or a person familiar with the matter.
This does not negate my point. A Netflix aquisition is unlikely to be blocked, even if its just rumor and theory right now.
If Netflix does engage with a Microsoft buyout, my sub drops.