261–270 of 410 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"It also is not unheard of for Wal-Mart to demand to examine the private financial records of a supplier, and to insist that its margins are too high and must be cut." https://www.fastcompany.com/47593/wal-mart-you-dont-know
Sorry if this gets too tangential, but ... you ever notice how people are horrified by that, but at the same time actively advocate that the government use its "bargaining" (monopsony) power to force down drug prices, and believe the only downsides will be to drug company profits?
Everyone seems overlook one sentence: > they can't run applications for the retailer Wal-mart doesn't really want it's data on Amazon servers. Amazon is pretty aggressive about mining any available data on competitors.
If libertarians don't realize that the system they're advocating for is essentially corporate feudalism, they're suckers. I'd rather have a powerful government accountable to voters than a powerful corporate oligarchy that is only accountable to shareholders.
Libertarians? Noooooooooooo /s
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While it seems ideal, I don't like the idea of consumer goods being regulated outside of groceries and other necessities. My Raptor romance novel should not be 'regulated'.
I suspect the author of a successful novel hopes for some form of regulation to help guarantee revenue from the effort.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry if this gets too tangential, but ... you ever notice how people are horrified by that, but at the same time actively advocate that the government use its "bargaining" (monopsony) power to force down drug prices, and believe the only downsides will be to drug company profits?
The receiver of the surplus (Walmart vs consumers) is kinda important...
Second, the real danger in both cases (though people only see it in one, hence my point) is that you're killing off the OEMs this way. No one wants to bring innovative new products to market if some monopsonist will just force them down to the mandated n% profits.
I sold to Walmart for 4 years. In the beginning we believed we were lucky to become vendors. Then we realized how much stress they created. Every single year they would short pay our invoices. We would have to submit a claim with Walmart accounting. This process was completely and utterly time consuming. But the worst of it, they wouldn't pay the invoices owed until a year later. It's hard to float a $100,000 short p…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Peeking at competitor data would be a short term great idea, long term terrible idea. You do it once, you'll do it again. You do it too many times, someone will rat you out and now your losing customers fast. Amazon may not be the most ethical company, but they've never been accused of short term thinking. It's just completely outside of what if expect from them.
Amazon is a collection of individuals. It only takes a small number of employees to circumvent the best protocols.
If libertarians don't realize that the system they're advocating for is essentially corporate feudalism, they're suckers. I'd rather have a powerful government accountable to voters than a powerful corporate oligarchy that is only accountable to shareholders.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The receiver of the surplus (Walmart vs consumers) is kinda important...
First of all, consumers get lower prices at Walmart, it doesn't just have the effect of higher profits. Second, the real danger in both cases (though people only see it in one, hence my point) is that you're killing off the OEMs this way. No one wants to bring innovative new products to market if some monopsonist will just force them down to the mandated n% profits.