He can argue that. But to me it seems more likely that culture and market demands are so different between the two companies that sharing any substantial resources would be to the detriment of at least one of the two halves. And more likely detrimental to both

The most beneficial thing is how even proposing this shifts peoples' perception of Gamestop from a beloved but struggling brick and mortar chain to a successful business

▲

sandworm101 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> to a successful business

Maybe from a brick-and-mortor store to yet another private equity fund whose continued existance comes solely from debt and merger trickery.

▲

cyanydeez 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

the only benefit I can see is some kind of eBay pick up and verification scheme where sellers use the gamestop locations to send their products and buyers go theere to pick it up. That would basically create a "this is garbage feedback" that could cleanup some of ebay's long standing problems in trust.

▲

mapt 3 hours ago | parent [-]

While this seems like the perfect synergy with a company that has too many branches and not enough business, those branches are also tiny. I'd bet employees are not enthusiastic about becoming UPS.

Becoming Radio Shack / Microcenter, as far as 3D Printing and DIY electronics, seems like it intersects with their target audience more, but they're also probably pretty short on space for that.

▲

cyanydeez 3 hours ago | parent [-]

yeah, their shops arnt sized to do much more than UPS style package movement.

I dont see it as a good value, but it's the only thing I see as a synergy. Otherwise it's just more garbage capitalism.

▲

alchemist1e9 3 hours ago | parent [-]

> garbage capitalism.

How is this defined?

▲

rchaud 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

A few things come to mind:

- SPAC IPOs that dodge standard disclosure requirements and worsen information asymmetry. See WeWork.

- Board positions filled with CEO loyalists instead of independent directors. See OpenAI firing Altman before Microsoft reinstated him.

- Management taking seemingly arbitrary decisions that turn out to be directly linked to their own compensation. SpaceX ordering a bunch of Teslas, or merging with a distressed asset (xAI). See above point on loyalist boards.

- The very concept of leveraged buyouts where financiers borrow money to buy a company, then put the burden on repayment on the company AND pay themselves hefty management fees. This inevitably leads to layoffs and a rapid decline in product/service quality while the company is scrapped for parts.

▲

jfengel 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Moving money around and pretending that there is more of it.

▲

alchemist1e9 2 hours ago | parent [-]

You mean leverage/borrowing? Pretty time tested mechanism of risk taking in free markets.

	▲	idiotsecant 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Moving money from one pile to another so that you can skim a little off the top is imaginary work and is slowly destroying the west

▲

smallmancontrov 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Slumlord owners of the network effect monopolies innovating ever lower investment in innovation and upkeep with ever higher increases in rent extraction, with a few nipple tassles slapped on the side to entice retail investor hype cycles.

▲

2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]