Hacker News Reader

This feels like the Microsoft strategy: sit on a pile of cash and watch others innovate, then buy the guys that succeed (or clone them if you can't buy them). It's a good formula for success because you don't take the risks of introducing an unwanted product into the market, and it's not a bad deal for the acquired besides.

View on HN

Did you mean Google strategy? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Google

Microsoft developed core products (Word, Windows) mostly in-house (after purchasing seed programs).

I would expect that success of FaceBook would be always defined by the core FaceBook product - social network, not by acquisitions.

Why would you expect that? By many metrics, Facebook's current valuation cannot be justified by their advertising revenue potential, so why shouldn't we expect Facebook to look to other products for revenue. Amazon, Google, and Apple all have very diverse revenue streams outside of their original core products (online retail, AdSense, and Macs), and in many ways it is the reason that these companies are so successful. If anything I would assume that Facebook is looking long and hard at opportunities to generate revenue from other products.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com