Skip to main content

When to Sell? Look at the HQ

I definitely think there is something to this theory of a company blowing up after it has invested share-owner dollars into creating a new HQ to celebrate the companies growth or a CEOs outsized ego (hey, it happens). There may be the rare exception to this rule as the article below calls like start-ups (see Facebook or Google) that have outgrown their current digs then obviously it will, like a kid hitting their growth spurt outgrowing their clothes, need at least something bigger to fit in and look good. But, I think what the author here is getting at is the underlying, real rationale for building or acquiring these new digs, Often times it seems companies build or acquire new buildings as trophies rather then taking those dollars and investing in research to enable; 1. increased share-owner profit (not sure how a brand new shiny building demonstrates that an executive team is using share-owner dollars wisely. Meaning how does the usage of those dollars increase share-owner value directly), 2. drive the long-term sustainability of the organization and 3. maintain the company as a leader in its industry. Rather moving into new buildings are often times can simply be elements to show off a company (or individuals) success in spite of the adage that success fools even smart people into thinking they can't fail. https://www.wsj.com/articles/when-to-sell-look-at-the-hq-1491768486

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is Eddie Lampert doing an Amazon to Amazon?

Back in the day Amazon used to sell books but it also had a strategic approach to broaden it's portfolio. That was to establish a seemingly non-hostile relationship with brick & mortar retailers like Toys 'R Us (see bankruptcy), Borders Books..etc. The goal? To get in front of the customer interaction. Amazon sold itself as an expert in the digital space and allowed for cost efficiencies (i.e: not having to build out a web-site or deal with the head-ache of how to fulfill product or the logistics on from where) from the brick and mortar company to focus on what it did best (selling in a physical store) while letting Amazon manage it's digital footprint which was a low volume mix relative to the traffic that was walking into the brick & mortar stores on a daily basis. But, as we all know now, by insinuating itself in the path to purchase and putting its brand in-between the customer and the brick & mortar brand Amazon was able to create a wedge that has grown

Apple Makes its Content Move

Right about now Tim Cook is probably wishing Steve Jobs hadn’t sold Pixar to Disney. Think of the arsenal of content and iconic characters not to mention the head start it would now have versus its tech peers (i.e.: Amazon and Netflix). Instead Apple is playing catch-up in an ever escalating content arms race. The first salvo Apple fired was back in June with the hiring of two former Sony execs to start up video programming positions that didn’t exist before at Apple. And now, after Netflix upped the ante by signing hit maker Shonda Rhimes, Apple has reportedly set aside $1 billion to invest in the creation of original content. BOOM? No, not really. Because that was the same amount that Amazon invested 4 years ago when it started up its original content machine and a pittance compared to what both Netflix and Amazon are projected to invest on programming this year ($6 billion and $4.5 billion respectively). BUT, Apple has a built-in advantage that neither Netflix nor Amazon can