4 ms·
Note that this is 10% of revenue so it is quite substantial.
by tyfon 6y ago
Note that this is 10% of revenue so it is quite substantial.
- ChuckNorris89 6y agoAs it should be. If we only fine them fees equivalent to change found between the couch cushions, then they have no incentive to improve. Especially for private information regarding ones health and sexual activity.
- wongarsu 6y agoExactly. This isn't a small oversight from Grindr, they share especially sensitive information (the fact that someone is gay/Bi) without the option to opt out (nevermind that it has to be opt-in).
- StavrosK 6y agoAnd 30% of profit, looks like: > Authority imposes a fine of 100 Mio NOK (€ 9.63 Mio or $ 11.69 Mio) on Grindr. An enormous fine, as Grindr only reported a profit of $ 31 Mio in 2019 - a third of which is now gone.
- pbhjpbhj 6y agoI mean, if they're still make profit then it's not really hurting, is it? Any impact on the decision makers?
- StavrosK 6y agoWell if you took away 30% of my year's income I'd be quite hurt.
- sofixa 6y agoIt's 30% of profit, not income, so more akin to someone taking 30% of your savings or "fun" money.
- pbhjpbhj 6y agoDo you mean emotionally hurt or, like, you'd struggle to eat hurt? Did they reduce CEO income by 30%? I'd be impressed if they had. Mind you some CEOs take 1000× median income so 30% is still pretty unlikely to hurt them (but I don't know the relevant details in this case).
- StavrosK 6y agoDo you think the fine should have been big enough that the company would struggle to function? It needed to be big enough to make it cheaper to comply than not. I believe it achieved that purpose. Anything else is just revenge.
- fckthisguy 6y agoFor traded companies, the stock price usually takes a bit when this happens. That put a fire under their ass even if loosing a load of money doesn't.