|
I must admit to surprise.
Was it not always the way that the weaker were overtaken by the stronger?
The survivor can embrace the resources (and opportunities) of the failed enterprise or abandon them. Which is preferable?
Whilst I don't support the contrived destruction of competitors it seems excessive to require the sale to a viable competitor. Is this ethical? What about a successful business having to give up part of its operation because it is successful? Would that be justifiable?
|