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

The article you reference blames the debt load.

> To compete, Toys R Us would have had to invest significantly in its website and stores. But the retailer was using most of its available cash to pay back its debt.

Yes, profits were falling crazily, but the company was still profitable. Without the debt load, they could've spent some time losing money while they pivot to a new business strategy. The debt load really prevented them from trying anything except surviving as long as they could.




> they could've spent some time losing money while they pivot to a new business strategy

There is zero evidence, in the history of Toys 'R' Us or their failed competitors, that another strategy would have worked. More likely? It would have limped along until the next recession. In any case, I see no reason to blame capital structure when a simpler explanation abounds: Amazon taught people to buy toys online.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

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

Search: