You must be registered for see links
So has the stage been set?
Anyone have any insight?
How are the small guys suppose to compete when giants are merging?
Though I appreciate the thought behind your analogy, it doesn't seem to line up entirely. Separate corporate entities don't become an issue until they fuse into super conglomerates whose sheer size and reach can compensate for any business malpractice, incompetence, or greed. I think it's better to have a market place filled with companies competing against each other since their easier to control, and benefit the consumer the most.. . . . .
Interesting choice of words.
However, sometimes a single opponent is far easier to fight. Rather than fighting a hydra of like-minded companies, allow them to all merge into one entity who, for any criminal actions, can have their assets seized and organizational structure routed, freeing up the smaller powers to auctions under new laws to keep those entities regional.
Just a thought. Not really much beyond just being a thought.
That doesn't work when they reach too big to fail status, which mergers like this would pretty much insure.. . . . .
Interesting choice of words.
However, sometimes a single opponent is far easier to fight. Rather than fighting a hydra of like-minded companies, allow them to all merge into one entity who, for any criminal actions, can have their assets seized and organizational structure routed, freeing up the smaller powers to auctions under new laws to keep those entities regional.
Just a thought. Not really much beyond just being a thought.
Not when the company distants it's product from one another. E.G when I was younger, I use to think Fanta was it's own company or it was owned by another entity. It turns out it was owned by Coca-Cola. So if something happend to Fanta, the brand image for Coke wouldn't be damaged. The different logos, Names and themes really muddy the waters up for people, even though the products/services are owned by a mega corporation.. . . . .
Interesting choice of words.
However, sometimes a single opponent is far easier to fight. Rather than fighting a hydra of like-minded companies, allow them to all merge into one entity who, for any criminal actions, can have their assets seized and organizational structure routed, freeing up the smaller powers to auctions under new laws to keep those entities regional.
Just a thought. Not really much beyond just being a thought.
I am not talking about an enduring structure, mind you.Though I appreciate the thought behind your analogy, it doesn't seem to line up entirely. Separate corporate entities don't become an issue until they fuse into super conglomerates whose sheer size and reach can compensate for any business malpractice, incompetence, or greed. I think it's better to have a market place filled with companies competing against each other since their easier to control, and benefit the consumer the most.
Everything is "too big to fail" to someone. But this is a failure to understand the problem. The infrastructure of the company still exists. The physical infrastructure, the employees who show up to work each day.... they are all still going to be there.That doesn't work when they reach too big to fail status, which mergers like this would pretty much insure.
Apparently, the telepathy plan is working fine.My AT&T Internet doesn’t work. It’s been down all day. Hmmm. I think conspiracy.
Did I miss the joke or something is going to have to change is never easy but it can lead to positive reinforcement is the addition of stimuli not accepting any requests at the moment to moment Or the overall collections at once and for all.Apparently, the telepathy plan is working fine.
That raw output of your thought process explains a lot.Did I miss the joke or something is going to have to change is never easy but it can lead to positive reinforcement is the addition of stimuli not accepting any requests at the moment to moment Or the overall collections at once and for all.