Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by rurp 36 days ago
It's wild to me how often I see corporate America both: 1. Spend immense amounts trying to build and improve a brand. 2. Toss well known brands aside as if they are useless.

Not that it's always the same company doing both at the same time, but it's crazy 538 was just left to die. It was a very recognizable brand among wonky professionals, a very desirable customer base. It's not as if politics and sports have gotten less relevant in the world over the past decade. ABC's decision to toss this aside is baffling.

Much of the 538 alumni seem to be doing well, either independently or as part of a major organization, so I don't think much was lost overall. But I sure empathize with the folks who lost their dream job and ABC looks pretty bad for frittering away a successful business for seemingly no reason. Taking down these articles is nonsensical.

5 comments

It's crazy. CBS has likely killed 'CBS News', '60 Minutes', and 'The Late Show', three brands worth likely billions if handled correctly. It's like they are scared of retaliation or something, allowing these brands to be destroyed for zero value in exchange. I've never seen anything like it in a free and open market.
Companies have a long history of mis-management of their acquisitions (and mis-managing their portfolio of projects outside their money-making expertise).

As you suggest, it's good that the alumni seem to be doing fine, although Harry Enten's commentary on CNN is not as thougtful as he was on 538 podcasts.

The 538 brand focusing on the quantitative aspects of politics and sports should have been massive in this age of omnipresent prediction markets and betting apps.
this is what the salesforces of the world do to startups every day. it is so painful to watch. billions upon billions wasted for just the stupidest possible reasons.
at least they aren't inefficient, like governments are. Because as you can clearly see market forces always lead to optimal resource allocations.
Like the billions invested in AI???
Pretty sure forlorn_mammoth had an implied /s in their post.
Hope so.
Some governments are inefficient…
Let's also take a moment to begrudge how government's guiding mission isn't to reap profit off its citizens. Are you even really American if you don't want your leaders to milk you for every cent you're worth?
On the other hand, many startups don't do anything usable enough that people would pay money for, and their only 'exit strategy' is to be bought by one of those large companies and then dissolved after a year or two.
On the other hand, it's nice for the people receiving those paychecks (at least while they're still receiving them).
Five thirty eight's relevance in the public eye peaked about 10 years ago. They missed on the Trump 1 election so badly it's like they weren't even aiming at the target. I think that damaged their credibility in a lot of folks' minds (mine, for example). That's the problem with hitching your reputation to your predictive ability. One big miss and you're discredited, forever.
EVERYONE missed on the Trump-1 election. Even Trump (IMO) didn't expect to win; he was copying another bad candidate's example of cashing out on a book deal.