Chess.com regional pricing: A case study • Hacker News Board

Re: Chess.com regional pricing: A case study

#81

Post by deaux » Tue, Oct 07, 2025, 5:19 PM UTC

briandoll wrote: post #20

remedan wrote: post #15

> It is the goal of every business to maximise profits. As a business, it is your responsibility to price your products in a way that will yield the most profit. This is how the article starts, and it might be somewhat off-topic, but I disagree. Plenty of businesses (at least privately held ones) have the goal of simply making enough for the owners to get by. Not to optimize for the absolute maximum. And why should t…

In short, the leadership team has a fiduciary responsibility to their investors. Privately held lifestyle businesses don't, at least not as much.

The leadership team absolutely does not have any responsibility to maximize short-term profit, whichis the claim this thread is about.

It has a responsibility to not actively and intentionally destroy the company, and to not use the company's resources for purely personal gain in a way unrelated to the company.

That's it.

This is also why you never hear about any company getting sued for anything related to this (let alone succesfully). Because it doesn't happen, as it's not a thing and any lawyer would immediately tell you you don't have a case.

Re: Chess.com regional pricing: A case study

#82

Post by rahimnathwani » Tue, Oct 07, 2025, 5:22 PM UTC

jjj123 wrote: post #76

rahimnathwani wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are some examples of worker cooperatives that are successful due to their focus on quality and affordability? What might I buy from them? (The only worker cooperative I knowingly buy from now is a local bakery/pizza place.)

As you mention, plenty of bakeries, grocery stores are worker owned. For example rainbow grocery is not _cheap_ but the quality is high and the bulk prices are not bad. For some reason two of the biggest and best flour brands are worker owned: King Arthur and Bob’s Red Mill. But if we’re talking bottom of the barrel prices, I don’t know many worker owned orgs that focus on that. Turns out when operations are more dem…

The post to which I replied was specifically about:

- worker cooperatives, and

- quality and affordability

I don't know whether worker cooperatives are more or less likely than a median business to generate negative externalities, so I won't comment on that part.

I wouldn't call Rainbow Grocery 'affordable'. It's been a long time since I bought anything there, but I recall it being much more expensive than every single chain supermarket (not just the lower end ones).

King Arthur and Bob's Red Mill are not 'worker cooperatives' as far as I can tell. They both have ESOPs (Employee Stock Ownership Plans), but I don't see anything suggesting they're run in a democratic (one employee = one vote) fashion.

Re: Chess.com regional pricing: A case study

#83

Post by wahnfrieden » Tue, Oct 07, 2025, 6:10 PM UTC

oooyay wrote: post #74

wahnfrieden wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is the idea of quality oriented “getting by” businesses popular here, but worker cooperatives generally scorned? A worker owned coop is more resilient to deciding to focus on quality and affordability than a business with investors and hierarchical ownership that can change (after a death or a sale etc)

I've never actually seen them criticized here but I'll bite since I've worked for one. Worker owned companies are just a different shade of typical corporate politics. I worked for North America's largest sewer inspection and cleaning company. The company did about equal volumes of each type of work but since inspection is more technology based there were far more cleaners than there were inspectors and analysts. I'd…

There are different ways to structure worker cooperatives and decision making. Have you seen the consent-based framework sociocracy uses (rather than majority voting or consensus)?

Re: Chess.com regional pricing: A case study

#84

Post by wahnfrieden » Tue, Oct 07, 2025, 6:14 PM UTC

rahimnathwani wrote: post #82

jjj123 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As you mention, plenty of bakeries, grocery stores are worker owned. For example rainbow grocery is not _cheap_ but the quality is high and the bulk prices are not bad. For some reason two of the biggest and best flour brands are worker owned: King Arthur and Bob’s Red Mill. But if we’re talking bottom of the barrel prices, I don’t know many worker owned orgs that focus on that. Turns out when operations are more dem…

The post to which I replied was specifically about: - worker cooperatives, and - quality and affordability I don't know whether worker cooperatives are more or less likely than a median business to generate negative externalities, so I won't comment on that part. I wouldn't call Rainbow Grocery 'affordable'. It's been a long time since I bought anything there, but I recall it being much more expensive than every sing…

https://www.bobsredmill.com/employee-owned Certainly many non-coop businesses have ESOPs but this says the goal is to transition to 100% employee-owned via the ESOP (rather than the typical single or low double digit employee grant pool). I recall reading that when Bob was dying he decided or had it in his will to transition his ownership fully to the employees.

edit: "100% employee owned / That happy day came in April 30th of 2020: as of our 10th anniversary, Bob’s Red Mill is now 100% employee owned, one of only about 6,000 businesses in the country to achieve this incredible feat."

Equal Exchange is a worker-owned co-op: https://equalexchange.coop their management leadership positions are rotating (across workers) and have compensation multiplier caps. The coffee at least is quite affordable compared with other specialty brands.

Thanks to zoning laws in Japan, whereby practically anyone is able to start a retail business with minimal capital and permitting requirements, there are many shops and food-related businesses that are worker-owned. Many are also highly affordable can be cheaper than chains or convenience options (apart from the very cheapest of chains).

Re: Chess.com regional pricing: A case study

#85

Post by mattkrause » Tue, Oct 07, 2025, 6:15 PM UTC

fluoridation wrote: post #78

mattkrause wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The timeline (short vs. long ) doesn't matter at all. The current shareholders have chosen the management (e.g., by voting for the Board) and are consequently agreeing to follow their plan. If you don't like that plan, you have other remedies: sell your stock, run for a seat on the board, etc. As you note, the future is uncertain, so courts don't want to be in the business of second-guessing facts and competencies.

>If you don't like that plan, you have other remedies: sell your stock, run for a seat on the board, etc. That exact same argument could be used to dismiss the concept of fiduciary duty altogether. "If the company doesn't operate in a matter you like just divest your stock."

The company doesn't exactly have a fiduciary duty to you. It (or more specifically, its agents) have one to the company itself. This can be broken in cases of fraud, illegality, or conflict of interest. For example, in Caremark and Trans Union, the directors were so checked out that they should have known better--you can't sell a company for a random value picked out of a hat.

Beyond that though, the business judgement rule is supposed to protect against second-guessing plausible decisions.

Re: Chess.com regional pricing: A case study

#86

Post by rahimnathwani » Tue, Oct 07, 2025, 6:37 PM UTC

wahnfrieden wrote: post #84

rahimnathwani wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The post to which I replied was specifically about: - worker cooperatives, and - quality and affordability I don't know whether worker cooperatives are more or less likely than a median business to generate negative externalities, so I won't comment on that part. I wouldn't call Rainbow Grocery 'affordable'. It's been a long time since I bought anything there, but I recall it being much more expensive than every sing…

https://www.bobsredmill.com/employee-owned Certainly many non-coop businesses have ESOPs but this says the goal is to transition to 100% employee-owned via the ESOP (rather than the typical single or low double digit employee grant pool). I recall reading that when Bob was dying he decided or had it in his will to transition his ownership fully to the employees. edit: "100% employee owned / That happy day came in Apr…

'worker-owned' and 'worker cooperative' are not the same thing.

Re: small busineses... Many family businesses are 'worker-owned' but they are not 'worker cooperatives' because either:

- there's only a single worker, or

- the decisions are generally made by a single person (e.g. 'head of family')

Re: Bob's Red Mill... it has a board and a CEO etc. It doesn't seem to be a 'worker cooperative'.

Re: Chess.com regional pricing: A case study

#87

Post by alberto-m » Tue, Oct 07, 2025, 7:20 PM UTC

paxys wrote: post #16

schnitzelstoat wrote: post #2

It seems like the US has really cheap pricing compared to Western Europe, especially when you consider the poorer countries such as Portugal, Italy, Spain etc. I wonder if they can get away charging higher prices in these countries because chess is more popular there.

It looks worse than it is, because: 1. US prices don't include sales tax. 2. All prices are shown in USD, which has fallen ~12% in the last few months. Adjust for both of these and Western Europe gets the plans for 20% cheaper.

The sales tax is a fair point, but not the currency one. American companies are extremely quick to increase the Euro-denominated prices when this currency becomes weaker; six months would have been more than enough to perform the opposite adjustment. Anyway I can see how selling in the Europe has more friction (legal risks, costs of translations etc.), which must somehow be compensated.

Re: Chess.com regional pricing: A case study

#88

Post by yardenshoham » Tue, Oct 07, 2025, 7:50 PM UTC

InsomniacL wrote: post #63

They priced me out of a subscription. £15 a month in the UK for an online chess game is crazy. I've paid for 3 months but this is my last. I'm only interested in Game review, but there are about 50 other sub-categories on their site that i don't use. Only their top tier of membership provides game review and to be honest it's not even that good. The game review is about the top 'computer' move, not what a human shoul…

Try https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/chesscom-analysis-a.... It allows free game overviews.

Re: Chess.com regional pricing: A case study

#89

Post by whatamidoingyo » Tue, Oct 07, 2025, 8:28 PM UTC

InsomniacL wrote: post #63

They priced me out of a subscription. £15 a month in the UK for an online chess game is crazy. I've paid for 3 months but this is my last. I'm only interested in Game review, but there are about 50 other sub-categories on their site that i don't use. Only their top tier of membership provides game review and to be honest it's not even that good. The game review is about the top 'computer' move, not what a human shoul…

Lichess is incredible. I canceled my membership and deleted my chess.com account due to frustrations from disconnects and laggy movement. Lichess doesn't have these issues. It just feels way better to play vs chess.com.

Re: Chess.com regional pricing: A case study

#90

Post by rockostrich » Tue, Oct 07, 2025, 8:56 PM UTC

paxys wrote: post #35

haunter wrote: post #29

Steam used to have (until 2016) a two tier regonal pricing in the EU (EU1 and EU2) but they had to stop it because it was discrimination that people in Sweden paid more for a game than people in Bulgaria. Now everyone in the EU pays the same as people in Sweden. And of course games haven't become cheaper either

There would be similar pushback if Steam started selling games for cheaper in Greenville, Alabama vs New York City. Plenty of regions in the USA have way worse economic disparity than the two you have highlighted. The point of being a single economic/political bloc is to be able to negotiate collectively and work towards a balance.

I don't think it'd be illegal in the case of the US though.