Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Big to small (Somewhat off topic)

  • Thread starter Charles Schuler
  • Start date
C

Charles Schuler

Jan 1, 1970
0
The current news is replete with failures of major US companies to generate
profits. It seems to be an epidemic. Is this the end of GM and Kodak and
their ilk?

Small companies are filled with enthusiasm, flexibility, and creativity and
yet violate vertical integration and other rules of business.

Small to big used to be a good thing, as it generated economics of scale.

Anti-trust laws were popular at one time. This, to me, is really weird. Ma
Bell is now trying to buy back the splinters. Government intervention is
99% wrong ... correct me if I am wrong.

I post this here as I am interested in the EE take on this (which is always
unique).

Will this trend continue?
 
G

Gary Peek

Jan 1, 1970
0
Charles said:
The current news is replete with failures of major US companies to generate
profits. It seems to be an epidemic. Is this the end of GM and Kodak and
their ilk?

Small companies are filled with enthusiasm, flexibility, and creativity and
yet violate vertical integration and other rules of business.

I think it is because the economy is such that it just can't support
large company inefficiency like it used to.

Most workers, at least in the US, simply don't work about half the time!

In a small company you can't get away with that, so small companies
actually get some work out of their employess.

Gary Peek, Industrologic, Inc.
 
M

Mac

Jan 1, 1970
0
The current news is replete with failures of major US companies to generate
profits. It seems to be an epidemic. Is this the end of GM and Kodak and
their ilk?

Small companies are filled with enthusiasm, flexibility, and creativity and
yet violate vertical integration and other rules of business.

Small to big used to be a good thing, as it generated economics of scale.

Anti-trust laws were popular at one time. This, to me, is really weird. Ma
Bell is now trying to buy back the splinters. Government intervention is
99% wrong ... correct me if I am wrong.

I post this here as I am interested in the EE take on this (which is always
unique).

Will this trend continue?

Anti-competitive practices are bad for consumers and defeat the natural
regulation of the free market. If there is a right kind of government
intervention, it is to punish illegal anti-competitive behavior.

The shenanigans that Microsoft got up to when it was at its worst were
despicable. I am quite certain that without fear of government
intervention, Intel would have gone that way, too.

There is nothing wrong with garnering huge market-share by out-competing
your rivals, but when you employ dirty tactics to squash your competition
and lock rivals out of the marketplace that is another thing altogether.

Just my $0.02.

--Mac
 
J

John Larkin

Jan 1, 1970
0
The current news is replete with failures of major US companies to generate
profits. It seems to be an epidemic. Is this the end of GM and Kodak and
their ilk?

In a dynamic economy, companies come and go. Kodak and GM wither,
Wal-Mart and Google grow, IBM and GE are forever.
Small companies are filled with enthusiasm, flexibility, and creativity and
yet violate vertical integration and other rules of business.

Vertical integration was a fad decades ago, and didn't work very well.
Small to big used to be a good thing, as it generated economics of scale.

Still does, if managed well.
Anti-trust laws were popular at one time. This, to me, is really weird. Ma
Bell is now trying to buy back the splinters. Government intervention is
99% wrong ... correct me if I am wrong.

Government intervention is necessary for a healthy business
environment... the right kind of intervention, of course. Antitrust is
still being enforced, not enough in my opinion.
Will this trend continue?

Which trend?

John
 
D

Didi

Jan 1, 1970
0
Will this trend continue?
Which trend?

I suspect the trend in question is big getting bigger.
Above a certain size a company becomes unmanageable
economically just like the centrally controlled communistic
countries had become some time (decades) before they
collapsed. BTW, many of the big "companies" nowadays
are economically larger entities than many of the collapsed
countries.
I suspect knowing that collapse is the only outcome of
the trend won't change a thing... the interested parties who
have the control invariably tend to think the collapse will
happen after their time (and this is typically correct).

Dimiter
 
J

John Larkin

Jan 1, 1970
0
I suspect the trend in question is big getting bigger.
Above a certain size a company becomes unmanageable
economically just like the centrally controlled communistic
countries had become some time (decades) before they
collapsed.

Do you think so? Exxon, IBM, Wal-Mart, McDonalds, GE, Boeing... lots
of huge companies are well-managed. They're big *because* they're well
managed. GM and Ford are in for some serious adjusting, because of
dumb management and dumber unions. And a lot of airlines, because
there are too many players in a high-investment, low-margin business.
But overall business is good, big and little, at least in the USA.
BTW, many of the big "companies" nowadays
are economically larger entities than many of the collapsed
countries.
Yup.

I suspect knowing that collapse is the only outcome of
the trend won't change a thing... the interested parties who
have the control invariably tend to think the collapse will
happen after their time (and this is typically correct).

Apart for the stupid dot.com fiasco, I don't see a trend for big
companies to collapse. Do you?

John
 
D

Didi

Jan 1, 1970
0
They're big *because* they're well

The *have become* big because they *have been* well managed.
Just wait until the person who brought them there is gone.
Apart for the stupid dot.com fiasco, I don't see a trend for big
companies to collapse. Do you?

I am not Hari Seldon so I may be wrong on this - hopefully I am - but
to see the effect you may have to wait for another decade or so.
I predicted this for the communistic countries so keep in
mind that I have a very good nose for communism creeping in...
but then again, I am not a psychohistorian and need not be
taken that seriously :) .

Dimiter
 
Top