Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Or, more likely, Niantic was doing badly (financially) and they wanted them gone. If they were doing well, why would they let them go?



I've always thought Niantic / Ingress was never intended to make a profit, but instead gamify exploration and map routes and whatnot where Google's street maps cars couldn't reach.

Google has a lot of services and products that don't earn them money directly (Chrome is probably the biggest one, Android another), but which do provide Google indirectly - Chrome's initial focus on speed meant lots more page views which caused lots more ad impressions which caused more income. In theory.


A number of reasons but usually focus. It's amazing how distracting even moneymakers that aren't core to the business are to big businesses.


Doing well or badly financially is usually reflected in the price you are getting for the spin-off. At the right price, even spinning off very profitable parts of your business can be good.

The argument about distraction still holds.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: