Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Why do they bother saying "Brands" when everyone knows that never happens?

Motorola, Kodak, Newsweek... whether they get bought out entirely or sold piece by piece, those brandnames are not going anywhere. They may get new management or aggressively downsize but there will always be Kodak products to buy, Newsweek will always be on the stands, and same for Motorola.

So why say the "Brands won't exist"? I don't get it.



Why do you say that "never" happens? Brandnames definitely do go away when they become liabilities and not assets.


Which won't happen to the brands he listed.

The only brands that have actually become net liabilities are a small handful of corrupt ones - Enron, WorldCom, stuff like that.

But Newsweek "disappearing in 2010"? Impossible.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: