Some startup competitions end not by outcompeting rivals quarter by quarter, but by a single structural move that closes the game entirely. Elad Gil calls these 'market ending moves,' and he catalogs five concrete types: merging with your main competitor, buying a key supplier, locking in a critical distribution deal, destroying an incumbent's cash cow, and raising enough capital to saturate a network effect market before anyone else can. The examples are specific. X.com merging with PayPal in the 1990s. IBM distributing Microsoft's early OS. TikTok buying traffic at scale. Google spending billions on early search distribution. Current SOTA LLM players raising tens of billions to cement oligopoly positions.
The detail worth reading for is not the list itself but the mechanics Gil surfaces underneath each move. Private-to-private mergers, for instance, clear regulators far more easily than public acquisitions, but they die on three internal problems: ownership splits, leadership control, and founder ego after years of trash-talking each other. Uber's rumored walk from a Lyft merger, followed by its actual subsidiary mergers in China and Russia, is the cleanest case study in this piece for understanding how companies substitute one market-ending path for another when the first falls apart.
Gil's closing argument is the most useful part: even if none of these moves are executable today, forcing yourself to brainstorm them surfaces M&A targets, partnership structures, and hiring priorities you would otherwise miss. The question he leaves open, and does not fully answer, is how to sequence these moves before a competitor does. That gap is exactly why the full piece is worth your time.
[READ ORIGINAL →]