Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="eyeheartawk" data-source="post: 9576471" data-attributes="member: 6727715">The fundamental problem is that Hasbro is a public company.Old school Keynesian economics would dictate that people/entities generally make decisions that are in their long-term self interest. This however did not really take into account the pressures of entering the capital markets. How many times have you heard that say, Amazon's stock decreased in value even though they posted X Billion Dollars in profit? But they only grew 1.2 %, time to take a bath.It used to be that, you could sacrifice increased short term gain for a healthier, sustainable business that would be better for business long term. Now, that's no longer possible. You need to grow, infinitely, forever to make the revolving door of people/funds who own your stock happy. Thus, because every possible efficiency and business process optimization has been, more or less, already made they squeeze their consumer, which is not a good long term strategy but works well enough in the short term for their shareholders and, not inconsequentially, the C-suite guys who derive alot of their compensation from stock and are only going to be there a few years, interests. It's why every app you love gets inevitably enshittified.So really, it's in nobodies interest (at least anyone making the decisions) to really strive for a model where you don't pressure the customer with subscriptions, micro transactions, needless products that cause them to tire of your product as a whole and just leave etc. I wanta da money now, I don't care about da money 5 years for now. I needa da money now.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="eyeheartawk, post: 9576471, member: 6727715"] The fundamental problem is that Hasbro is a public company. Old school Keynesian economics would dictate that people/entities generally make decisions that are in their long-term self interest. This however did not really take into account the pressures of entering the capital markets. How many times have you heard that say, Amazon's stock decreased in value even though they posted X [B]Billion [/B]Dollars in profit? But they only grew 1.2 %, time to take a bath. It used to be that, you could sacrifice increased short term gain for a healthier, sustainable business that would be better for business long term. Now, that's no longer possible. You need to grow, infinitely, forever to make the revolving door of people/funds who own your stock happy. Thus, because every possible efficiency and business process optimization has been, more or less, already made they squeeze their consumer, which is not a good [I]long term [/I]strategy but works well enough in the short term for their shareholders and, not inconsequentially, the C-suite guys who derive alot of their compensation from stock and are only going to be there a few years, interests. It's why every app you love gets inevitably enshittified. So really, it's in nobodies interest (at least anyone making the decisions) to really strive for a model where you don't pressure the customer with subscriptions, micro transactions, needless products that cause them to tire of your product as a whole and just leave etc. I wanta da money now, I don't care about da money 5 years for now. I needa da money now. [/QUOTE]

Verification