What’s a company that objectively improved after it got “bought out?”
Everyone knows the tale of Brand X getting bought out by some faceless global conglomerate and going to shit, but does the opposite ever happen?
You are viewing a single comment
Everyone knows the tale of Brand X getting bought out by some faceless global conglomerate and going to shit, but does the opposite ever happen?
What is the difference, in your mind, between changing owners and buying out a company?
To me they're the same thing and this is an appropriate reply for OP. Is it just a matter of scale for you? (I think we'd all like bigger examples, but this still works)
I definitely think the original post meant things like retail stores, social media platforms, nationwide chain restaurants, etc
I think the term the OP used was "faceless conglomorate".
I heard Matt Stone's face was ripped off by Scuzzlebutt, and Trey Parker was conglomerated into a dawson's creek trapper keeper, so seems like a fair answer to me.
Sure, but that was just additional context for my question, which was what this poster feels is the difference between changing owners and buying out a company.
They're thinking of changing owners vs buying a corporate company with a CEO. Yeah they're similar lol but not really what the post is asking for on here
Again with the fixation on the OP. Let me be more direct: I didn't ask you.
The context provided in the question is of big companies buying smaller companies and ruining them. OP asked if “the opposite ever happens”, which I interpret to mean a big corporation buying a smaller company and it NOT going to shit.
Sure we can talk about any change in ownership whatsoever, but that seems like a complete change in topic with an obvious answer.