Quote:
Originally Posted by whswhs
Probably, because there's a lot, but that's the high level outline.
I think the original logic was
Q: How did you get that incredibly advanced technology?
A: We spent vast amounts on researching it.
Q: How did you get all that money?
A: We sold the products of the incredibly advanced technology.
and then when it was pointed out that the process of getting all the money would run afoul of antitrust and other laws,
Q: How did you get the money to research that technology?
A: We changed the law.
Q: How did you get the political power to change the law?
A: We used incredibly advanced technology to influence political outcomes, and we spent vast amounts of money on doing so.
I think this all seems circular.
|
No, no, no, you got it all wrong. They had some money to start with, Jeff Bezos style, each of them coming from different sources such as XX century MMORPG games, movies, artwork and performances, then they invested that money to develop new technologies, the cheap ones coming first, and they used those technologies to make revenue, which then they proceeded to reinvest. At some point, you dont specify when, they get a lawsuit about posible monopoly practises because of the merger, so they invested some of the money into running the political game.