mergers

The question is, does the architects of LBOs and mergers and business like this have any duty to build more buffer and ability to withstand unpredictable futures?

They just fade away, and then the remains get bought (although such are technically called 'mergers').

Yes the current thought is that neutron star mergers are the source of heavy elements (iron and greater) over supernova.

There's a lot of indication that, on average, mergers and acquisitions destroy shareholder value [1] [2].

After a series of mergers and acquisitions US air space is close to oligopoly.

Not only could there have been complete turnover in the intervening years, but there could have been various mergers, acquisitions, and spin-offs.

There have been two mergers, not one (Ninite is also a merger).

Huh, I thought those were originally GTE's, and that they eventually became Verizon's with all the mergers and name changes.

I worked there for a couple of years at their end-of-life (ICL mergers) on the 4100 series, and some prototype peripherals.

I wonder if there is any way to train people to design better mergers.

Through a confusing series of mergers and selloffs in the 1980s, involving about five companies, the money transfer business ended up with the Western Union name.

Much of that change is the result of mergers.

Nucleosynthesis of heavier materials in supernova explosions and neutron star mergers are two cases of problems that I guess are used for "publicly" validating dark codes.

Many "enterprise" systems live in complex environments that have accreted all sorts of cruft and complexity over the decades, possibly as a result of mergers and acquisitions, regime change, etc.

Klein "argues that the climate crisis cannot be addressed in the current era of neoliberal market fundamentalism, which encourages profligate consumption and has resulted in mega-mergers and trade agreements hostile to the health of the environment." Amen.