Personally I support this. If they're cutting their staff, they don't need to be spending on a program that gives away more than it brings in. I'm assuming the

Personally I support this. If they're cutting their staff, they don't need to be spending on a program that gives away more than it brings in. I'm assuming they rationally did the math to see if the program was a net contributor to bottom line or not. (That's the sort of rigor i've come to expect from a company like Amazon)