Just a few years ago, everyone loved Facebook, Amazon, Google and Apple (FAGA). Not just the devices and applications we use every day – we still love them – but the companies themselves. Many – if not most of us – thought FAGA were the good guys, helping everyone optimize digital opportunities and live more fulfilling personal and professional lives. After all, they’re the new economy, the platforms that enable our lives, and the tools we love to share. How many of us recruited customers for these tech giants without hesitation, apprehension, guilt – or compensation? We can’t imagine living without FAGA! That’s love.

We loved everything about them, their leadership, their logos, their stores, their products and even their style. Always there, always cool. We looked the other way when critics pointed to offshore manufacturing, controversial labor practices, fake news, ruthless price wars, offshore cash and even questions about planned obsolescence. Love is blind.

The Bloom Is Off The Rose

What happened? We realized that maybe, just maybe, FAGA were no different from car companies, real estate brokerages, banks, insurance companies, big pharma and other technology companies – those guys. When FAGA joined the family of “regular” companies they lost some appeal. In fact, if the trend continues, FAGA might even find themselves on the list of some of the most disrespected companies! One of the companies already made the wrong list (#6, behind Wells Fargo and just ahead of Spirit [Comcast was #1]): “Facebook has been a boon for shareholders since its IPO … however, not everyone is pleased with the social media platform. In recent years, the company has drawn significant criticism over its privacy policies and the mass data collection of its users. According the company’s statements, Facebook collects data on nearly anything it can, including who its users communicate with, users’ financial transactions, and the types of devices users are connecting with … recently, the company faced sharp criticism for not doing enough to curb the spread of fake news leading up to the U.S. presidential election.”


Then we realized that information isn’t always helpful when it’s actually disinformation. We realized that “fake” could be purchased by anyone (on the platforms that enable our lives), including foreign adversaries committed to destabilizing the United States. Facebook and Google distribute information and disinformation without distinguishing nearly enough between the two. We also realized just how much money FAGA stashed outside the US to avoid paying US taxes. While the 2017 tax act may help bring some of that money back, what – many have asked – was it doing there in the first place, especially given the revenue FAGA generate from Americans? 2017 made it clear that FAGA exist for their shareholders, partners, executives and customers, in that order. What an awakening for even the love-is-blind crowd: just say it ain’t so! Just another company?

Net Neutrality Remorse

We also realized that net neutrality was a real issue, and – according to most surveys – most Americans want the Internet to remain as “neutral” as possible. We don’t like our ISPs as much as we once did, do we? We’re now a little suspicious about who runs the Internet – and why “control” is so important to a handful of companies – who may even want to sell our browser histories without our consent! What about privacy? We’re starting to get the picture. The good news is that FAGA supported net neutrality, though the motives and behavior of some were questioned. But all that information that the repeal of net neutrality frees? Well, a lot of it is already in the hands of FAGA.

Anti-Trust Threats

We realized – finally – there’s huge tech consolidation right under our noses. A few companies – including the FAGA team – control most everything digital. This makes us think a little differently about the role these companies play in our lives, especially when one of them wants $1,000 for a phone, another one takes money from unfriendly countries, one of them controls Internet search and one dominates ecommerce.

Amazon is the largest online retailer. Facebook is the largest social media platform. Google is the largest search engine with the greatest online ad revenue. Apple owns the US smartphone market (though Samsung has gained ground). The anti-trust playing field is calling: Amazon owns AWS (Amazon Web Services), Whole Foods, Alexa, CreateSpace, Kindle, Audible, Audible.com, DPReview, Box Office Mojo, Goodreads, Twitch.tv and AbeBooks, among lots of other companies and technologies. Facebook owns Instagram, Facebook Payments, Atlas, Instagram, Onavo, Moves, Oculus, WhatsApp, Masquerade and CrowdTangle, among other companies and technologies. Alphabet (Google) owns YouTube, Google Search/AdWords, Google Maps, AdSense, DoubleClick, Google Commerce/Wallet, Google Drive, Android, Google Chrome, Google Play, Nest Labs, Google Deep Mind, Calico, CapitalG, Google Fiber and Jigsaw, among many other companies and technologies. Apple owns Shazam, Emagic, Siri, Beats Electronics, NeXT, Novauris and PrimeSense, among many other companies and technologies. FAGA are also acquiring more companies every year. Does it end somewhere predictable? Since definitions of anti-trust change with each political administration in Washington, it’s hard to predict how anti-trust issues will evolve. While definitions of anti-trust should not swing so wildly, we live in turbulent political times. With pressures from consumers, the US Congress and the Executive Branch, there’s a good chance that anti-trust legislation will appear in 2018 or shortly after – especially as consolidation increases. If the Democratic party wins the House of Representatives back in 2018, anti-trust discussions will begin – despite all the donations tech companies give to Democrats. These are strange times, and the technology industry is not immune from political volatility.

Privacy Pushback

Information powers most of the web’s business models. Customization and personalization require information, data and knowledge about consumers and customers – which we gladly provide in exchange for “deals” of one kind or another. But how much personal information should we provide? How much do we want our vendors to know about where we are and what we do? There’s not much privacy in the digital age, at least not the way we define either today. How long will it take consumers to score the relative value of personalized transactions versus privacy? What will they decide? It’s unlikely that consumers will continue to share increasing amounts of personal data with Internet service providers, online retailers or their social media platforms if the price is total transparency for a free drink. Will 2018 be the start of major privacy pushback? Yes.

More Breaches At Greater Cost

If you haven’t been hacked, you’re lucky. Is it only a matter of time? Yes. The chances are excellent that your data is already somewhere beyond your control: think Equifax, eBay, Target, Yahoo, Home Depot, JP Morgan Chase, TJX, Heartland Payment Systems, Anthem, Verisign, Adobe, RSA Security, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and Sony PlayStation, among many others. If you’ve had nothing to do with any of these hacked vendors, you may be OK. But it’s a long – and growing – list.


2018 will be the year of mega-breaches: bigger breaches with much bigger impact. When more individuals and corporations feel the effect of massive data breaches, they will blame their vendors, no matter who’s at fault. The question – “why can’t my vendor protect my data?” – will be asked too often in 2018. The financial services industry is obviously the most at risk, since it’s the hub of personal and corporate financial data. But other hubs, like FAGA, also possess extraordinary amounts of personal and corporate data. What happens when everything we do – and all the web sites we visit – are published? As more and more of our personal and professional lives move to the web, we can expect more breaches, more damage and more anger.

Small Currents Or Sea Changes?

Will positive sentiment toward technology companies continue to fall in 2018? Yes. The open question is how far it falls and whether the fall can be reversed. Prediction? This is the beginning of a new identity for FAGA and many other technology companies who were loved so dearly (and blindly) for years, but will now face a reckoning about their relationship with their customers, their government and their competitors. The party’s over. Too bad for them and especially for us. It felt good to love FAGA. I doubt we’ll ever feel that way again.