Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ulorian - Agent of Chaos" data-source="post: 9245239" data-attributes="member: 16668">?I didn't claim anything. Are you sure you understood my post?No, they haven't! Frankly, I don't think you have. You are literally doing the thing I was talking about in the post you responded to.I haven't excused anything. Again, are you sure you've understood what I've posted?For sure.It might have. But it isn't Hasbro's responsibility to keep afloat businesses whose primary reason for existence is the presence of one of their product lines. It might make a business sense for Hasbro to do so (and I think that it does), but it isn't their responsibility. It would be altruistic of them to do so, at the (perceived by them) cost to themselves. It's fantastic when people behave altruistically. Believe it or not, in my daily life, I go well out of my way to do so. It makes the world go round. But to expect that to happen as a matter of fact, and to start a business and take responsibility for the livelihoods of others, and hang your hat on the expected altruism of others... you have done wrong by the employees of your business.Did streaming services have a responsibility to keep video rental chains in business? How about the horse and buggy industry? Should Ford, etc. have kept that alive as well? At some point, the business operator who owns a business that isn't required anymore or has otherwise fallen out of favour needs to take ownership and move in a direction that protects their employees and their business.Don't attribute to malice an action that is beneficial to others but doesn't happen to benefit you. They might be protecting their interests or the interests of those under their care (but probably the former).Now you have made a pragmatic and practical decision, right on.I would too.</blockquote>

Verification