2 ms·

I'm sorry, but I can't take your argument seriously. Big companies put terrible and "risky" ideas like this into practice all the time. Yeah, I don't believe th

I'm sorry, but I can't take your argument seriously. Big companies put terrible and "risky" ideas like this into practice all the time. Yeah, I don't believe that it's just one small conversation, but the length doesn't matter. What matters is that many companies are super willing to do this, and Amazon isn't the most reputable either. Believing that companies like them do care about risk, when there would be no real penalty for doing this, is simply silly.

throwaway2016a 9y ago
I'm sorry, you lost me, I give up. > when there would be no real penalty for doing this, Huh? Amazon: Amazon Prime + Amazon AWS (developers pay to host Alexa skills) + Amazon Music Google: Google Play Apple: Home Kit licensing + iTunes + App Store + Apple Music Unlimited + Stock price How would losing even a tiny fraction of those be "no real penalty"... just 10% of Amazon Prime subscribers is $100 - $200 million per year. I am not saying companies don't take risk. You have to if you want to make a profit. No company ever has made a profit without either taking a lot of risk or being insanely lucky. With the risk takers being far more common. I'm saying do the math. Amazon Prime is a multi billion dollar business. You'd have to be an idiot to take that risk. Smart companies make money by taking the right risks not all risks. This is a bad risk. It'd be as if Bezos decided suddenly to turn an AWS availability zone into a Bitcoin Mining facility. I'm done. You win.