5 ms·
Meh, they could just produce the stuff and not sell it, if they want to reduce supply.
by Anderkent 9y ago
Meh, they could just produce the stuff and not sell it, if they want to reduce supply.
- throwaway2048 9y agothats much harder to justify to regulators and inquests.
- jjoonathan 9y agoIf they're allowed to by contracts and the law, sure.
- freehunter 9y agoIs there a law saying you have to sell a product? Seriously asking, I've never heard of that and it sounds odd to me but honestly I have no idea.
- jjoonathan 9y agoContracts can absolutely require you to deliver something in the future. That's often the entire point. Penalties for failure to deliver often depend on circumstance -- e.g. "our bargaining position got better and we want a higher price" isn't an acceptable excuse but "oops, looks like an act of god destroyed your chips, now you'll have to pay the higher price" is. Laws play a role too. The most egregious market manipulation tactics are often illegal, especially when monopolies are involved. Of course, this doesn't do much to dissuade the manipulation itself, but it does make companies jump through hoops to disguise what they're doing. Samsung can't send a video of someone in a Darth Vader costume saying "The deal has changed." to their customers, because that would be a smoking gun and easy to prosecute. "Oops, 3% of the product was destroyed, looks like prices will just have to go up" achieves the same end but keeps plausible deniability in tact. Or it could be a legitimate accident. There is certainly no shortage of things to go wrong. Just remember: Hanlon's razor is trivial to exploit. Live by Hanlon's razor, die by Hanlon's razor.
- mc32 9y agoThere are some things which manipulating supplies are not allowed. These typically are foodstuffs, water, medcines, and other basic needs, under some circumstances. I'm not sure Electronic components fall in that category.
- sm64 9y agoThen that needs to change. Flash storage is an essential commodity.
- repiret 9y agoBaloney. There are great many people who would die if the price of their food, or their water, or their medicine doubled tomorrow. If the price of flash doubled, many people would have to choose between less storage, slow storage, or less money for other things. But nobody will die. In fact, I bet the intersection between the people whose lives would be at risk from a sharp increase in food, water or medicine, and the people buy any amount of flash every quarter is nearly zero.
- zdfjkhiuj 9y agoImagine that you run a charity. Your job is to save lives. Should you spend every penny you get on medicine and spend nothing on IT? Of course not. It's impossible to run a charity like that. You must have computers, and you would prefer it if they are fast and reliable. You choose to divert some money from your programs to have efficient administration. Now imagine the cost of flash doubles. You're forced to choose between "less storage, slow storage, or less money for other things." All of those options mean more death. Flash storage can be more important than medicine for the sick or food for the hungry.
- jasonjayr 9y agoIf they make it, and not sell it, now they have to store it, insure it, and secure it. And then if they have too much, and run out of storage space, they now have staff with nothing to do.