• ChicoSuave@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      The challenge is the startup costs and retaining skilled help. The only folks with the resources to cover these costs do so with the expectation of selling the company for more money, a long term investment for the investor. Gathering these resources without the expectation of selling or being the one buying others is probably untried and hugely difficult.

    • Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’ve said it before, and I will say it again: the endgame of a capitalist system are monopolies or cartels.

      Usually it takes the following steps:

      1. Bunch of little start-up - everyone wants a piece of the pie

      2. Some start-ups can’t hack it and either go under or are absorbed by other start-ups

      3. Surviving start-ups grow to mid-size of major sized ventures depending on how many competitors or competitor market shares they absorbed

      4. Repeat step 2 with remainder of companies until a few are left

      Presto changeo you got yourself a cartel or monopoly. Consumer power is nil.

      Example sectors to look at for this: food production industry, mining, computing/silicone Valley

      • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        In 2, there’s generally no difference whether they go under or not. If they had anything valuable when they went under, it’s absorbed by a competitor. Machines, labor, etc.

        • Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          While I am roasting you in this meme, you legit had a good catch. Thanks for that. Autocorrect, I guess.

          I’m just pointing out Cunningham’s law lol. Never fails

        • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          AT&T is about the size of T-Mobile and Verizon

          So, AT&T, the Deutsche tel / pacNWBell fka AT&T Frankenstein, and Bell Atlantic fka AT&T

          They’re all AT&T except for the part of Pac NW Bell AT&T that got bought by, essentially, German AT&T.

          I want to believe they don’t collude and perform, but I’ve lived in Canada and seen the decades-long dance between Rogers(fka Shaw fka AGTel + BCTel) and Rogers(Rogers) before they became just Rogers.

          And now I’m sure that was all founded on a sugar empire.

          But our major players have been dancing around each other for a long time before one bought the other – and I’m sure it’s just to save on Green Fees at the club because it’s not one corporate rate.

      • Lettuce eat lettuce@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        100% true. Capitalist firms will always be motivated to get the most people possible, to pay as much as possible, for as little as possible.