Burger King Vs McDonalds
Cassandra Hubbart, DailyFinance
There was the time Thomas Edison electrocuted an elephant to demonstrate the danger of a competitor's technology. The day that Nike (NKE), desperate for an advantage over a surging Reebok, signed a college hoops player named Michael Jordan. And the time the Central Pacific Railroad laid an astounding 10 miles of track in 24 hours to grab government payments that the hated Union Pacific would otherwise claim.

Rivalries make great stories, and the greatest rivalries make the greatest tales -- reason enough to read the following portraits of brilliance, skullduggery, nobility, mendacity, victory, and failure. But if you're the driven type who demands more practical benefits, you'll find those here too. After all, monumental business battles have changed the world. We cannot imagine life without cellphones or the Internet, but if tiny MCI hadn't challenged the titanic AT&T (T) (the No. 4 rivalry in our ranking), the communications revolution would have played out much differently. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates (No. 6) ended up selling few competing products yet contended for 35 years to impose radically different visions on the world of computing. And a global economy that couldn't function without air travel is far faster and better because Airbus and Boeing (BA) (No. 9) have had to fight each other every day for 40 years.

But powerful rivalries can be blinding, obscuring events beyond the combatants' battlefield. Coke (KO) and Pepsi (PEP) (No. 1) were so busy pounding the daylights out of each other that they missed an entirely new notion, and today, inconceivably, the bestselling energy drink in U.S. convenience stores isn't made by either company. (It's Red Bull.) General Motors (GM) and Ford (F) obsessed over each other until one day Toyota (TM) had stolen the bulk of their profits.

What comes through most strongly in these stories is each conflict's sheer human intensity. Only a brave novelist would have imagined the brother vs. brother saga of Adidas vs. Puma (No. 20). Venice vs. Genoa (No. 7) may look like a dusty tale of feuding city-states, but it set the tone for hundreds of years of European competition. The rivalry between the railroads was economic, ethnic, and spectacular, involving sabotage, deception, and death.

Who needs such lessons? Oh, right, you do. So think of these dramas as guilt-free pleasures. Then, well prepared for the task, go forth and pulverize your rivals.

Increase your money and finance knowledge from home

Understanding Stock Market Indexes

What does it mean when people say "the market is up 2%"?

View Course »

Investing Like Warren Buffett

Learn from one of the world's best investors.

View Course »

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

1 Comment

Filter by:

The Nike v Reebok comparison is a little come-lately. The real running shoe battle started in the late 50's. In the '56 Melbourne Games, Adi Dassler pretty much had the games covered with his Adidas brand. His estranged brother, Rudolph Dassler couldn't stand it and started Puma. In the '60 Rome games, Armin Hary won the 100 and 200M in Puma's. By Mexico '68, Tommie Smith and John Carlos wore the velcro-closure Puma's and each put a Puma shoe on the medal platform when they each raised a gloved first. In the '68 100M, Jim Hines set a WR in Adidas Azteca Gold, Nike and Reebok didn't exist. Today, neither Nike or Reebok can match the quality or craftsmanship of the Dassler brothers' shoes. The days of supple, conforming and light weight, hand crafted kangaroo leather shoes is gone. I still have a pair I wore racing in '71 and the leather remains creamy soft.

Winner: kangaroos
Loser: athletes running in plastic/mesh shoes.

March 25 2013 at 12:51 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply

Funny how this story completely missed CBS vs. NBC.

March 24 2013 at 8:12 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply