Quote:
Originally Posted by taustin
You seem to have a real issue with the idea that doing the right thing can be a good business decision. And that doesn't make it any less the right thing to do.
|
I never said it was. I said they made their decisions for business reasons, and they should be looked at as decisions made for business reasons. I never said those decisions (by any company) couldn't also be the right thing to do.
Customers, at least smart ones, look at their return on investment the same as businesses do. Should I shop
here where the prices are cheaper, or
there where the guy who owns the place helps me out? (people who use the help from #2 and buy at #1 are parasites) In neither case is the business making their decision for altruistic reasons. In one case, the business thinks that lower prices will bring in more customers, and their total profit would be higher than it would be with a higher per-unit profit but fewer sales. In the other, the business thinks that personal service will bring in more customers, and their sales will increase while keeping up the higher per-unit profit. They don't lower prices because they like you; they do it because they like your money. And they don't help you out because they like you, either; they help you out because people they help spend more money. In either case, they're trying to predict how the customers will want to maximize their ROI, and position themselves to be the business that provides what the customers are looking for.
What I don't get is why people seem to find this so shocking. This is nothing new. It undoubtedly predates
Homo sapiens, back to when some
erectus swapped a sharpened stick for a deerskin. It may not be comforting to think that business decisions are made for business reasons, and "we do it all for you" is just marketing, but they are, and it is. There's nothing hateful about saying that businesses make decisions based on what will help them rather than harm them.
Do you not decide where you will spend your money based on the benefits you expect to see from it? For instance, if you choose to patronize a local store rather than a big chain, don't you do so in expectation of personal service, or just having that local business present to keep the area around it vibrant? Or, on the other hand, if you choose to patronize a big chain, don't you do so because you can buy more of what you need for the same amount of money, and maybe have some left over to do other things you want with? You don't say "well, I think doing
this is really bad for me, and I won't get any benefit out of it, but I'll do it anyway." That would be crazy. We're not crazy. Neither is Apple.
There's nothing hateful about it; just acceptance of the fact that there aren't any rainbow unicorns, and rational people do things for rational reasons. Businesses make the best decisions they can
for their business, just like individuals make decisions that benefit those individuals. The big difference is that individuals have a lot more freedom to make decisions that benefit themselves in intangible ways (feeling good about their contribution to society, for instance) while businesses are constrained to produce benefits that can be shown on a balance sheet and printed in the annual report.
I mentioned at one point charitable donation as something that individuals do because they feel good about doing it. That's an intangible benefit. Would you give money to a charity if you hated yourself for it? If every time you thought about it, you wished you hadn't done it? Obviously not. Certainly not more than once. You give money or time to charities because you're buying something from them: you're buying good feelings. You think "I'm glad I did that" and that feeling of happiness is worth as much or more to you than the money or time it cost you. If it wasn't,
you wouldn't have done it. For a lot of people, it
isn't worth the cost, and they donate nothing.
I really have to wonder, why the insults? Why the mud-slinging? I've said that a business made a good business decision, and their decisions in general are made for business reasons, and a lot of people want to take issue with that. What would the alternative be? Should someone praise Apple for making a
bad business decision? (Apple Lisa, anyone?) Are there people really arguing that this action -- which has gotten them very good publicity, I might point out -- was a
bad idea? Or that it will hurt Apple in the long run?
Seriously, I'm asking: how does pointing out that a business made a business decision for business reasons justify the level of vitriol that has been flung my way?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by queentess
And I still tend to purchase from that Panera just because of how well they treated me that one night.
|
A number of years ago, a printer I owned stripped its little plastic gears. HP troubleshot it on the phone, than said "the FedEx guy will be there tomorrow morning." He was. They swapped out my printer. HP has since sold me a scanner, another printer, a computer (well, not for me, but I made the buying decision) and entirely too much printer ink. They did right by me, so I figure it's good to buy stuff from them instead of someone who might or might not be there when a printer eats its gears. And I've told many people who wanted advice on electronics purchases why I like HP. They made out like bandits from that printer swap. Which was exactly the point. They didn't swap my dead printer for a working one because it was the right thing to do; they did because there was a good chance that I'd tell other people "yeah, those guys at HP did right by me." Which I just did. It's good business.