2 ms·

> Spotify exists to make investors money by creating value for the listeners. Okay, sure. > [...the rest of the post...] I don't see how this connects. > yo

by ljm 6y ago

> Spotify exists to make investors money by creating value for the listeners. Okay, sure. > [...the rest of the post...] I don't see how this connects. > your opinions and the opinions of the employees don't matter But your opinion does? It must matter to you, since you spent a few paragraphs on it.

trts 6y ago
> But your opinion does? It must matter to you, since you spent a few paragraphs on it. Guessing that what ljm meant was that those opinions shouldn't be important in their personal choice about what to listen to or not listen to.
- ljm 6y ago
  I was (admittedly poorly) pointing out that the person I was replying to made some effort to share his favourable opinion, which comprises a significant part of the post, while also saying the dissenting ones (mine, Spotify staff) don't matter. Their logic dictates that none of our opinions matter. That's fine by me; we're squabbling over nothing.
  - JPKab 6y ago
    I responded above. I was talking about the opinions not mattering to decision makers in charge of investor capital.
JPKab 6y ago
My opinion matters to Spotify executives only so much as me being a paying customer of their platform. They are free to make whatever decisions they want, but are obligated by law to make decisions that benefit their investors. If you are a paying Spotify customer, then yes, your opinion matters to the executives. Expressing my opinion on a message board isn't a claim that the executives should listen to me.
- kodah 6y ago
  > They are free to make whatever decisions they want, but are obligated by law to make decisions that benefit their investors. I'm unaware of any law which requires a business to make money for investors. A business can promise to pay dividends and they can speculate on where their stock can be at a future date, but there is no legal recourse if they lose money.
  - finnthehuman 6y ago
    It's a meme about the case Dodge vs Ford Motor, but all that case said was you can't actively screw your shareholders. Henry Ford had a cash surplus and was deliberately trying to avoid paying dividends to the Dodge brothers.
    - kodah 6y ago
      Oh, yeah that makes sense. TIL
  - yazaddaruvala 6y ago
    This might be useful: https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/08/24/stakeholder-governance-and-the-fiduciary-duties-of-directors/ https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/08/24/stakeholder-gover...

by ljm 6y ago

trts 6y ago

> But your opinion does? It must matter to you, since you spent a few paragraphs on it. Guessing that what ljm meant was that those opinions shouldn't be important in their personal choice about what to listen to or not listen to.

ljm 6y ago
I was (admittedly poorly) pointing out that the person I was replying to made some effort to share his favourable opinion, which comprises a significant part of the post, while also saying the dissenting ones (mine, Spotify staff) don't matter. Their logic dictates that none of our opinions matter. That's fine by me; we're squabbling over nothing.
- JPKab 6y ago
  I responded above. I was talking about the opinions not mattering to decision makers in charge of investor capital.

JPKab 6y ago

My opinion matters to Spotify executives only so much as me being a paying customer of their platform. They are free to make whatever decisions they want, but are obligated by law to make decisions that benefit their investors. If you are a paying Spotify customer, then yes, your opinion matters to the executives. Expressing my opinion on a message board isn't a claim that the executives should listen to me.

kodah 6y ago
> They are free to make whatever decisions they want, but are obligated by law to make decisions that benefit their investors. I'm unaware of any law which requires a business to make money for investors. A business can promise to pay dividends and they can speculate on where their stock can be at a future date, but there is no legal recourse if they lose money.
- finnthehuman 6y ago
  It's a meme about the case Dodge vs Ford Motor, but all that case said was you can't actively screw your shareholders. Henry Ford had a cash surplus and was deliberately trying to avoid paying dividends to the Dodge brothers.
  - kodah 6y ago
    Oh, yeah that makes sense. TIL
- yazaddaruvala 6y ago
  This might be useful: https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/08/24/stakeholder-governance-and-the-fiduciary-duties-of-directors/ https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/08/24/stakeholder-gover...