Live data from Hacker News

A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)

thehustle.co

461–470 of 499 posts

Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)

#461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt almost anyone on HN is squeaky clean with what they said and wrote as a teenager.

He wasn’t a teenager.

He was 19. Neuroscientists tell us that in most people, the pre-frontal cortex (the rational decision-making part of the brain) doesn't fully form till the mid 20s, which is why everyone says douchey things, well into their 20s.

We have no idea what his real thinking/motivation was behind that comment, but a combination of adolescent bravado and incredulity that this stupid little app he'd hacked together was working so well would suffice, at least as well as casting him as a 19-year-old moustache-twirling super-villain-in-the-making would.

This is the one-and-only such quote of his from that period that gets invoked. If that's the most scandalous piece of dirt anyone could dig up on him from his entire early life, he's not doing too badly.

I sure as hell wouldn't fare so well.

Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)

#462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then it's not a stretch then to say all workplace romances between staff members and the people under them are coercive.

Yep. It's not a stretch at all. In the military it's strictly forbidden and there are rules in place in case two people accidentally fall in love where there's a power imbalance. Sex/romance with a subordinate in any organization is such a bad idea for so many reasons. Possibility of coercion is one, favoritism and dissent among other subordinates is another.

I agree on the idea, but where to draw the line?

A direct report is definitely a bad idea, but what if it's someone who reports to one of your reports?

Or someone who report to another manager?

etc.

At some point it should become ok. Completely forbidding people to find romance at the workplace would make it feel so gray, especially given the time you sink in it.

Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)

#463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always noticed Targets to be cleaner, better lit, and have more employees available to assist than Walmarts. I also have read many times that Walmart forces manufacturers to cut quality to meet certain price points for products sold in their stores, whereas I haven't heard anything like that about Target. This makes me trust Target more, plus their website doesn't allow resellers.

Everything Walmart does, Target also does, and as impossible as this sounds, Target cares substantially less about its employees. And walmart.com is built to be a marketplace, like amazon.com, so of course it allows resellers. You can hate what Walmart is and stands for, but to find Target acceptable is inconsistent.

Target is also really into surveillance capitalism. I don't know how Walmart compares, but Target definitely does its best to do creepytracking of every customer.

Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)

#464

So I've actually done a fair amount of research on this speech, and there a few skipped points most times people report on it. Firstly the audience loved the jokes, they laughed at them all. It wasn't like he delivered them to stunned faces and immediate shock. The only thing that brought him down was a newspaper reporter noted it down and newspapers pushed it as an artificial scandal. Everyone buying 5 pound earring…

Plus it was only the Ratners brand that was damaged. The Ratners group owned a shed load of other Jewellery brands and they were unaffected. The group renamed itself Signet Group and rebranded some the of Ratners stores and closed the rest.

The group carried on and became one of the biggest jewelery companies on the planet.

The speech scandal was merely a blip in the history of the company.

Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)

#465
post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it wasn't even the first time he had publicly made these sorts of jokes, in fact it wasn't even the first time they had been published in the papers. > This was entirely a newspaper driven downfall That first point is good evidence that the jokes weren't very responsible for what happened. But it seems like it's just as good evidence that newspaper coverage also wasn't very responsible. Why attribute it to the news…

It wasn't the newspapers, 1991 was the peak of the 1990 recession in the UK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_1990s_recession#Civil_un...

Raters was well placed amongst jewellers to ride the recession. I remember the news coverage of this well - the decline in sales was rapid and directly attributable to the speech, and the implication that his customers were mugs.

Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)

#466
post #399
post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol wtf? Only one airport is “in” london and that’s London City. Which is an expensive thing mostly made for bankers to go to Frankfurt etc. I assure you all those airports serve London. I live here

Yeah, I know it's just semantics. I have wasted too much of my time in delayed trains trying to get into London to believe that. And based on travel times you could add some other airports to that list of London Airports. Southampton Airport is faster to get to than Stansted or Luton for a lot of Londoners. And with HS2 BHX could probably change its name too.

I’ve never had a Stansted Express be late more than 10 min, and I live in east london so it’s super fast to get to Liverpool St. I suppose your travel time varies a lot.

Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)

#467
post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I know it's just semantics. I have wasted too much of my time in delayed trains trying to get into London to believe that. And based on travel times you could add some other airports to that list of London Airports. Southampton Airport is faster to get to than Stansted or Luton for a lot of Londoners. And with HS2 BHX could probably change its name too.

London Ashford is closer to France. I wonder if the airport would close if the CEO admitted that...

I had no idea there was such a thing!

Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)

#468
post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Eg Holland has a number of cheap shoe chains. Schoenenreus and Scapino both breathe an air of cheapness, and one went bust and the other is struggling bad. Their direct competitor Van Haren sells exactly equally crappy shoes, and everybody knows it, but they are thriving, simply because the store feels like a proper high quality shoe store. Same in the US with Target and Walmart. They sell exactly the same discounte…

I've always noticed Targets to be cleaner, better lit, and have more employees available to assist than Walmarts. I also have read many times that Walmart forces manufacturers to cut quality to meet certain price points for products sold in their stores, whereas I haven't heard anything like that about Target. This makes me trust Target more, plus their website doesn't allow resellers.

> I also have read many times that Walmart forces manufacturers to cut quality to meet certain price points for products sold in their stores, whereas I haven't heard anything like that about Target.

This is less insidious than it sounds. Walmart's strategy is a volume play - they optimize their product mix against selling the highest volume of products, rather than products that may have a higher individual margin but lower sales volume.

They're also intimately familiar with the elasticity of price for everything they sell. If a manufacture comes to them with Product A, Walmart won't purchase Product A if they can't price it at the optimal point for their target market (which encompasses a large cross section of the general population). But their procurement volume is so high that they can commit to absurdly large order quantities. So instead of just walking away, they'll work with the manufacture to comb through the bill of materials[1] and adjust things such that a Variant B of Product A can be produced more efficiently or cheaply, then sold to Walmart at a wholesale rate that allows them to hit their target retail price. This can be as simple an adjustment as reducing a 3 year warranty down to a 1 year warranty. Or swapping out a fragile but sleek looking component with a more robust but worse looking (or heavier) component, thereby reducing expected warranty claims and overall product cost. Or if they feel a particular component is likely to not be used by 90% of their purchasers (i.e. a marketing gimmick the manufacturer threw in for differentiation) they'll ask for it to be removed. Or if a particular component is overbuilt for their audience they'll ask it to be swapped out with a lower quality component (keeping in mind that Walmart has lots of data from returns to understand what does and doesn't work well). Or it could be a feature that is turned off/disabled to give the manufacturer cover for selling (and letting Walmart sell) the product below the equivalent product sold to other retailers.

Keep in mind that returns and warranty claims all cost money, as well. And at the volume of sales Walmart has, even minor increases in these can have very noticeable increases in costs/decreases in profitability and negate the entire benefit of creating a new product variant to hit a specific price point. So in that vein, you can be sure that the new variant will meet the consistent quality expectations of products purchased at Walmart, even if they don't necessarily meet the quality expectations you might have of purchasing that brand elsewhere. It's basically a private label product commissioned by Walmart that still happens to have the manufacturer's brand name attached to it.

Target and other large retailers do the same thing, they just don't necessarily have the volume to have enough leverage to get manufacturers to do it on as many things as Walmart does, nor the internal competencies to do it at such a deep level. They also have different points of price sensitivity for products, based on the particular demographics of their consumers. You're more likely to see fuzzying around with quantities/volumes instead, since the primary manufacturing run is the same and you only require a custom pack during final packaging.

And to that point, manufacturers do the same thing themselves frequently. Consumers are price sensitive and manufacturers for years have been absorbing price increases on raw materials while maintaining price points. They do so by either maintaining the same quality of individual units and just silently shaving off quantity, or else decreasing the quality and maintaining quantity. These changes usually come along with refreshes/redesigns of product packaging, in an attempt to mask them from notice.

Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)

#469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Indeed a number of companies have been successful specifically because they talk like real human beings and readily admit the strengths and weaknesses of their products. I'm curious - can you name a couple?

Dominos used the lousy quality of their pizzas to market a revamped recipe.

That's not quite an apples to apples comparison. CEO of the jewelry store was saying that his current products were crap. I'm assuming Dominos was saying "our old recipe was crap, new receipe is good."

Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)

#470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He wasn’t a teenager.

He was 19. Neuroscientists tell us that in most people, the pre-frontal cortex (the rational decision-making part of the brain) doesn't fully form till the mid 20s, which is why everyone says douchey things, well into their 20s. We have no idea what his real thinking/motivation was behind that comment, but a combination of adolescent bravado and incredulity that this stupid little app he'd hacked together was working…

People typically refer to 13-18 as teenage. 18 and over. College in general is referred to as young adult or even adult.
Post reply on HN