Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg
No one really knows how much they need to worry about being punished for destroying competitors, low pay, opposition to union organizing, or taking tax benefits from hard-pressed states and municipalities. So far, it hasn't hurt them. But, as the mutual funds are forced to disclose, past performance doesn't guarantee future results. And often it isn't at all predictive. So the Amazonians can't make those kind of decisions rationally. Deciding how much emphasis to put, in making usiness decisions, on ethical precepts, can't be done with a spreadsheet.
|
I think your ADS is starting to show a little, Steve. Do you seriously expect a large successful company like Amazon to to save compaetitors from their own poor decisions, pay higher wages than market for no benefit, encourage Unionisation of their workforce and refuse incentives from states and municipalities trying to give their residents jobs and attract much needed money to their communities. Amazon is not perfect but it is in business, not charity. Your above criticisms read like a good plan for bankruptcy. Amazon is not alone. Most bookshops of any type pay minimum wage etc. And the behaviour of the large publishing houses can only be described as predatory.
Personally I doubt Amazon will have serious anti-trust issues, though I am not of course a US lawyer. Amazon benefits consumers by keeping prices low. If it continues to do so post-B&N I think it will be a case of plenty of smoke but no fire. If Amazon believes they are on firm ground legally I can't see the inevitable whinging putting them off. The main question for them is whether they have other things to hide which increased scrutiny may bring to life. They have nothing to be ashamed of with anything you have listed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg
If you want to look at the effect of bad decisions, read more about the New Republic, one of whose articles you linked in #7. Every big publisher I know of has been far more successful at keeping their headline writers from bolting than has that sadly diminished former national treasure.
The New Republic is a good example of an organization that had the vision to go all out for digital while alienating long-time key writers. I no longer subscribe. Since I am just one person, this means nothing. But they've lost so many other subscribers, while going from weekly, to biweekly, to, now, ten times a year, that I can't even find them owning up to their current circulation figures.
|
I did not say that B&N have a monopoly on making bad decisions.