Jason Kuhn

If you go back to the last big O election, outcome that we had in antitrust law, which was AT&T in the 70s and 80s. That lawsuit was a decade long, right? And essentially what happened was when it looked like AT&T was going to lose the case, they were the ones that proposed splitting itself up.

If you go back to the last big O election, outcome that we had in antitrust law, which was AT&T in the 70s and 80s. That lawsuit was a decade long, right? And essentially what happened was when it looked like AT&T was going to lose the case, they were the ones that proposed splitting itself up.

And so I think that this is going to start this really interesting chess game here, where obviously Google has to appeal and fight this. But if it looks like the political pressure is going to build and the courts aren't going to let them off the hook and have a little-o outcome...

And so I think that this is going to start this really interesting chess game here, where obviously Google has to appeal and fight this. But if it looks like the political pressure is going to build and the courts aren't going to let them off the hook and have a little-o outcome...

probably the best thing to do is for Google to initiate it themselves because they can answer a lot of the questions that Friedberg just raised. And they'll do it in a way where going back to the people that matter along with the customers and the employees are the shareholders. You can do it in a way where the sum of the parts will be greater than the value today of Google.

probably the best thing to do is for Google to initiate it themselves because they can answer a lot of the questions that Friedberg just raised. And they'll do it in a way where going back to the people that matter along with the customers and the employees are the shareholders. You can do it in a way where the sum of the parts will be greater than the value today of Google.

So I think that there's a shareholder win. It needs to be offered by Google and then negotiated. But to be really honest with you, Jason, when I kind of was thinking about it last week, I really thought this was a single digit probability. I still think it's a single digit probability. And if it grows, it's the most meaningful thing that's happened in technology, quite honestly.

So I think that there's a shareholder win. It needs to be offered by Google and then negotiated. But to be really honest with you, Jason, when I kind of was thinking about it last week, I really thought this was a single digit probability. I still think it's a single digit probability. And if it grows, it's the most meaningful thing that's happened in technology, quite honestly.

Zach, your thoughts.

Zach, your thoughts.

Not could, not could. They must in order to capture the maximum economic value.

Not could, not could. They must in order to capture the maximum economic value.

No. And the reason I say no is that I think that people's reaction to these things become more sophisticated in time because folks go back and actually study what happened in the Ma Bell situation, AT&T and the R box, what happened in Microsoft. And so I suspect that they know how to shield the rank and file employee from whatever's going to happen. So I think that that's less likely.

No. And the reason I say no is that I think that people's reaction to these things become more sophisticated in time because folks go back and actually study what happened in the Ma Bell situation, AT&T and the R box, what happened in Microsoft. And so I suspect that they know how to shield the rank and file employee from whatever's going to happen. So I think that that's less likely.

I don't think so either, because I think that these things get put into a very... type group of people, mostly lawyers, who then go and deal with this issue. I think that there's an acute moment where if they think that they're going to lose an appeal or that appeal is not going to get heard, then yeah, I do think management and the board are brought together.

I don't think so either, because I think that these things get put into a very... type group of people, mostly lawyers, who then go and deal with this issue. I think that there's an acute moment where if they think that they're going to lose an appeal or that appeal is not going to get heard, then yeah, I do think management and the board are brought together.

And again, if history is a guide, they should want to propose the terms on which they break their own company up. Because I think if the government tries to decide, there's going to be so much imprecision that they'll break the company. And I think that would be a shame because I mean, look, take a step back The breaking up of Google is great for competition and for startups.

And again, if history is a guide, they should want to propose the terms on which they break their own company up. Because I think if the government tries to decide, there's going to be so much imprecision that they'll break the company. And I think that would be a shame because I mean, look, take a step back The breaking up of Google is great for competition and for startups.

But let's not forget, Google is an incredible company that has created enormous amounts of good. They have done way more good than bad, way more, like three, four, five orders of magnitude more good than bad. And to break a company like that, I think would be a really bad outcome. From a competitive dynamics perspective and game theory, it's pretty reasonable to hobble them.

But let's not forget, Google is an incredible company that has created enormous amounts of good. They have done way more good than bad, way more, like three, four, five orders of magnitude more good than bad. And to break a company like that, I think would be a really bad outcome. From a competitive dynamics perspective and game theory, it's pretty reasonable to hobble them.