One thing that surprised had to do with eliminating today's competitors through mergers and acquisitions. I never knew much background information about it, but I thought participating in mergers was always beneficial, because if it were not then why do it? I wasn't aware that it can actually reduce an industry's profit potential.
I'm confused as to how the value can be drained through the rivalry among existing competitors. If you are competing with someone, it is because you both have something good, so wouldn't that make both of the competitors valuable?
If I could ask the author a question I would ask him what made him select these five forces specifically, rather than making it more than just five. All reasons are very good but I was wondering why theres no other forces other than those five.
There's nothing that I think the author is necessarily wrong about. However, like I stated in the beginning, I'm just confused as to why mergers aren't always beneficial. I feel like the whole point of a merger is to benefit from its results.
No comments:
Post a Comment