Meta, Apple, Netflix, LEGO, and other strategies that changed the course of companies in crisis

Sometimes it's not a crisis. It's an obsession. A strategic commitment that grows so large that it ends up devouring a company's core business, resources, even its identity . That, word for word, was what happened to Meta .

By the end of 2022, the company once called Facebook had invested more than $100 billion in its metaverse dream . In that year alone, the Reality Labs division in charge of the project generated operating losses of $13.7 billion. The company decided to change its name, reorganized its teams, and burned capital at a rate of $1 billion a month, even in the leanest quarters. But no one—not employees, investors, or users—quite understood why.

Internally, doubts were widespread. In an anonymous survey, comments like "the metaverse will be our slow death" or "Zuckerberg is going to single-handedly sink this" were common. The CEO's enthusiasm wasn't enough to mask a deeper problem: the vision wasn't clear. Neither the technology, the market, nor the culture were ready for such a leap.

The result was what we're already familiar with, including mass layoffs, declining advertising revenue, and a metaverse that didn't completely disappear, but took a backseat as Meta refocused on artificial intelligence (AI). In the words of Mark Zuckerberg , 2023 would be "the year of efficiency," marking a definitive shift toward AI and cost control.

Apple lived a parallel story. For more than a decade, it invested billions in Project Titan, an autonomous, electric car without a steering wheel. It was supposed to revolutionize transportation. But time passed, costs rose, and technological advances failed to materialize.

According to Bloomberg , Apple spent approximately $10 billion on this project from its inception in 2014 until its official cancellation in February 2024. Apple engineers even proposed lowering the required level of autonomy (from Level 5 to Level 3), allowing the car to operate alone under certain conditions, always with a driver as backup. The answer was a resounding “no.” They wanted a car that didn’t need humans. They wanted science fiction .

In early 2024, the company officially canceled the project. Not for lack of ambition, but for an excess of it. And while many saw it as a failure, it was also a decision that prevented an even bigger disaster. A bad product launched halfway would have done more damage than admitting that it simply wasn't the right time.

Failing is not failing

The interesting thing is that these stories aren't new. The names change, but the dynamic repeats itself. In 1993, IBM announced the largest corporate loss in US history at $8 billion. The company, which had dominated the 20th century with its computers, had fallen behind in the software and services race. But its new CEO, Lou Gerstner, had an unorthodox idea. Instead of protecting the legacy, he dismantled it. He sold divisions, outsourced production , and transformed IBM into a technology solutions company for corporate clients. What seemed like a retreat was, in fact, a reinvention. Today, more than 70% of IBM's revenue comes from services and cloud computing. A radical move, but a winning one.

Netflix did something similar in 2011. When it announced it would separate its DVD business from its streaming business, users reacted furiously. The attempt to launch Qwikster, a separate DVD brand, led to the loss of 800,000 subscribers in a single quarter and a 75% drop in its stock, according to The New York Times . Many predicted the beginning of the end . But the company didn't back down. It persisted. It stood firm. And that same step into the abyss was what allowed, shortly after, the birth of its new era: original production. In 2013, House of Cards arrived, and the rest is history.

Back to the origins

And then there's the most fascinating example of all. In the early 2000s, the Danish company LEGO was racking up years of losses. It had launched clothing, theme parks, video games, dolls... everything except what it did best. Building blocks were on the back burner, the catalog was chaotic, and the brand had lost traction. The situation was so critical that the company was considered for sale.

According to Forbes, between 1998 and 2003, LEGO lost approximately $300 million, and its debt exceeded 200% of its annual revenue. But then Jørgen Vig Knudstorp arrived. A young CEO with a single mission: to save LEGO by returning to its core. He sold assets, cut products, reorganized the entire company , and put bricks back at the center of the board. He focused on strong licenses (Star Wars, Harry Potter), quality, and listening to fans.

It even launched LEGO Ideas, a platform where users themselves propose sets. If an idea gets 10,000 votes, the company manufactures them. This is how some of its most successful products were born. In 2023, LEGO was named the world's most powerful brand by Brand Finance, surpassing giants like Ferrari and Coca-Cola.

Today, LEGO is not only profitable: it's one of the most valuable and beloved brands in the world. But its success didn't come from great innovation. It came from great correction. And that, perhaps, is the most important message. In an environment that glorifies perpetual growth, constant expansion, and continuous disruption, these stories demonstrate that boldness isn't always about moving forward, but about knowing when to step back.

Because innovation isn't just about creating. It's also about eliminating. Refocusing. Saying "no." And, above all, having the courage to abandon an idea when there's still time to avoid the blow. What differentiates IBM, Netflix, LEGO, or even Apple from other companies that have actually gone under isn't that they never failed. It's that they knew when to stop. And that, in business, is worth its weight in gold.