Techcrunch
The article argues that the era of traditional corporate conglomerates like GE is fading, being replaced by 'personal conglomerates' led by individuals like Elon Musk, who controls multiple diverse ventures under his personal influence and wealth.
AI 生成摘要
文章指出，以奇異公司（GE）為代表的傳統企業集團時代正在式微，取而代之的是由像伊隆·馬斯克（Elon Musk）這樣的個人所領導的「個人集團」，他透過個人影響力和財富掌控著多元化的事業體。
Latest
AI
Amazon
Apps
Biotech & Health
Climate
Cloud Computing
Commerce
Crypto
Enterprise
EVs
Fintech
Fundraising
Gadgets
Gaming
Government & Policy
Hardware
Layoffs
Media & Entertainment
Meta
Microsoft
Privacy
Robotics
Security
Social
Space
Startups
TikTok
Transportation
Venture
Staff
Events
Startup Battlefield
StrictlyVC
Newsletters
Podcasts
Videos
Partner Content
TechCrunch Brand Studio
Crunchboard
Contact Us
Aerospace, energy, healthcare, mobility, and media. Thirty years ago, we’d be talking about General Electric. Today, we’re talking about Elon Musk. He’s the CEO of Tesla, xAI, and SpaceX, which also owns the telecoms company Starlink. He owns the social media platform X. He’s developing neural implants and underground tunnels. He’s put at least $10 million behind fertility research.
Musk also appears to be merging several of these ventures into one conglomerate.
Musk has frequently been likened to Henry Ford. A more apt comparison might be to John D. Rockefeller or Jack Welch, who took GE from an ailing industrial company into a sprawling conglomerate.
The Welch comparison could turn out to be particularly valid if Musk follows through on rumors that he’s trying to merge some combination of SpaceX, xAI and Tesla.
The similarities aren’t all encompassing, of course. GE was a company, and Musk is a person. But the distinction can get a bit blurry in an era when his net worth eclipses the market cap of 97% of the S&P 500. In fact, Musk’s net worth is approaching $800 billion, almost as much as GE at its peak when adjusted for inflation.
At its height, GE was often inseparable from its chairman, Jack Welch.
Musk, the individual, captivates many of his peers, just like Welch did. Executives today talk of being “hardcore” and espouse “first-principles thinking,” just like CEOs of the 1980s sought to emulate Welch through “accretive” mergers and mass layoffs.
Today, Musk’s empire spans Tesla, SpaceX, xAI (including with X), Neuralink, and The Boring Company, all companies with very different goals. Sure, Teslas drive through The Boring Company’s holes, xAI’s Grok is available in the automaker’s vehicles, and Tesla has supplied its Megapack batteries to xAI’s data centers. But apart from sharing Musk’s ownership or leadership, they’ve had limited interaction with each other until recently, when Tesla and SpaceX separately invested in xAI.
At one time, not so long ago, GE was the world’s most valuable company, with divisions that made light bulbs, jet engines, home appliances, X-ray and ultrasound machines, steam turbines, locomotives, and television shows, among dozens of others.
When Welch took the helm of GE in 1981, he inherited a company adrift, having lost a fifth of its market cap in the preceding decade. His first move was to trim headcount. In fact, he laid off so many employees — more than 100,000 in his first few years — that he became known as “Neutron Jack,” an allusion to the neutron bomb, which eliminates people while leaving buildings intact.
With the savings, Welch went out and acquired company after company. Many of them manufactured stuff, similar to GE’s existing businesses. But some, like NBC, which Welch bought in 1986, did not. That one was added to the portfolio to expand the company’s influence. (Sound familiar?)
During his tenure as chairman of GE, Welch was revered for his management abilities, with rival CEOs emulating his management style. The company’s management training program was put on the same pedestal as top business schools, and several of his proteges went on to run Fortune 500 companies themselves. Through a relentless series of layoffs and acquisitions, Welch had turned GE into a money printing machine. The company grew from $14 billion when he took over to over $400 billion when he left in 2001. Shareholder dividends only went up.
But Welch’s approach wasn’t ironclad. In 2001, his last year at GE, the company’s share price declined. By the time the 2008 financial crisis hit, it was clear that the company’s conglomerate structure was hiding some grievous flaws.
Profits from GE Capital were used to paper over poor performance in other divisions. When it became clear that GE Capital was deep into questionable financial instruments, fractures in the business model widened. GE Capital was ultimately bailed out by the federal government to the tune of $139 billion, but the shine was off. Five years ago, GE announced that it would split itself into three separate companies. The conglomerate was no more.
Aside from Welch, Musk might have another comparison a bit farther back in history, before GE became the prototypical conglomerate. “I think it’s much more of a robber baron story than a GE conglomerate story,” David Yoffie, professor at Harvard Business School, told TechCrunch.
In the Gilded Age, he said, people like J.P. Morgan and John D. Rockefeller controlled large, powerful companies that built new industries like railroads and oil companies. They controlled those firms either directly or through board seats they influenced, and they could mix and match companies as they pleased.
“I think that’s much more the type of approach that Elon is taking,” Yoffie said. “It’s much more about ego, market power, and trying to be the kingmaker.”
Much of the robber barons’ power came from two sources: their tremendous wealth and the lack of regulation at the time.
Wealth disparities have grown similarly large in recent years. John D. Rockefeller’s wealth was equal to a percentage point or two of the United States’ total GDP, about the same as Musk’s today.
“What’s different, of course, is that there was no regulatory framework whatsoever during the period of the Gilded Age,” Yoffie said. “Today, we obviously live in a much more heavily regulated world, but we’re also at the moment living in a world in which regulation is getting pulled back and therefore is less and less of a constraint.”
What ultimately happens to Musk and his empire will depend both on the direction he decides to take things — to merge his companies or keep them separate — and how society responds to his growing power. Musk, like his Gilded Age predecessors, has been attempting to put his thumb on the scales, spending more than $300 million trying to influence elections in the U.S. and abroad.
If Musk ends up merging one or more of his companies, he’ll end up with a true conglomerate, something that’s not in vogue today. Conglomerates in the U.S. emerged as a way for investors to hedge risk by buying shares in one company that has businesses that are counter-cyclical, Yoffie said. If one division hits a rough patch, others can pick up the slack to keep revenue and profit smooth.
“Most of that strategy and approach was debunked in subsequent decades,” he said. Investors tend to do better when they buy shares in more specialized companies, which are able to operate more efficiently. Conglomerates also make it difficult to disentangle the different businesses to accurately determine their value. “It’s well known in finance that there’s a conglomerate discount,” Yoffie said.Merger talk aside, the biggest constraint on Musk’s companies might be regulation, which is ultimately driven by public opinion. The tycoons of the late 19th and early 20th centuries found their power ultimately checked by a wave of new regulations introduced in the Progressive Era. Musk has a knack for embracing visions of the future that captivate people’s imaginations and translating them into business plans. The question is, how long will he be able to keep it up?
Topics
Senior Reporter, Climate
Tim De Chant is a senior climate reporter at TechCrunch. He has written for a wide range of publications, including Wired magazine, the Chicago Tribune, Ars Technica, The Wire China, and NOVA Next, where he was founding editor.
De Chant is also a lecturer in MIT’s Graduate Program in Science Writing, and he was awarded a Knight Science Journalism Fellowship at MIT in 2018, during which time he studied climate technologies and explored new business models for journalism. He received his PhD in environmental science, policy, and management from the University of California, Berkeley, and his BA degree in environmental studies, English, and biology from St. Olaf College.
You can contact or verify outreach from Tim by emailing [email protected].
Tickets are live at the lowest rates of the year. Save up to $680 on your pass now.Meet investors. Discover your next portfolio company. Hear from 250+ tech leaders, dive into 200+ sessions, and explore 300+ startups building what’s next. Don’t miss these one-time savings.
Elon Musk’s SpaceX, Tesla, and xAI in talks to merge, according to reports
Waymo robotaxi hits a child near an elementary school in Santa Monica
Tesla is killing off the Model S and Model X
Everything you need to know about viral personal AI assistant Clawdbot (now Moltbot)
The price gap between Waymo and Uber is narrowing
Meta to test premium subscriptions on Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp
Anthropic launches interactive Claude apps, including Slack and other workplace tools
© 2025 TechCrunch Media LLC.