5 ms·
An entire department was just rendered useless. I genuinely don't feel bad.
by akira2501 2y ago
An entire department was just rendered useless. I genuinely don't feel bad.
- kasey_junk 2y agoWas probably a whole company right? Pretty good argument that Forbes the traditional media property and Forbes the seo giant are 2 different things: https://larslofgren.com/forbes-marketplace/ https://larslofgren.com/forbes-marketplace/
- fakedang 2y agoAnd Forbes the SEO giant was going to buy out the legacy media property.
- readyplayernull 2y agoI wouldn't be surprised of the whole thing being automated.
- _DeadFred_ 2y agoIt was funny watching the warrior whatever site back in the day when Panda came along. Love when these people get their horrible business models kneecapped. Now let's make corporate stock manipulation illegal again and ban corporate stock buybacks. Talk about a purely manipulative business strategy.
- red_trumpet 2y agoWhat's the problem with stock buybacks?
- mathgeek 2y agoCouple articles that explore that: https://hbr.org/2020/01/why-stock-buybacks-are-dangerous-for-the-economy https://hbr.org/2020/01/why-stock-buybacks-are-dangerous-for... https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/07/are-stock-buybacks-starving-the-economy/566387/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/07/are-stock-...
- notyourwork 2y agoNothing directly, it just sounds bad at face value.
- _DeadFred_ 2y ago'Stock manipulation is cool, especially when you change executives pay structure to be based purely on said manipulation. Totally creates healthy incentives not perverse ones.'
- notyourwork 2y agoSorry, buy backs are not stock manipulation. Let's step back from emotions and political skew. A company is able to take their capital and deploy it how they see fit. This can include purchasing percentage ownership of their company back from stockholders. Whether or not you agree doesn't make it manipulation in the general sense. It's just a way for a company to use their money.
- _DeadFred_ 2y agoWhy do they repurchase the stock? In order to impact the stock's value (also known as manipulating it's value). That is the definition of stock manipulation. No emotions involved, no need for the passive aggressive attack that I'm somehow being emotional. It's not just a way for a company to use their money. It is a company intentionally using funds for stock manipulation, many times by executives who directly benefit from said manipulation. Companies even take out loans purely to re-purchase stock.
- notyourwork 2y agoYou have a shallow understanding of economics and the stock market. Sorry but your cynical view is not something that generalizes to stock buybacks. And the example of taking a loan out can be financially sound. Using debt when cheap to deploy capital can be beneficial.
- l33t7332273 2y ago
- _DeadFred_ 2y agoThey are nothing but direct stock manipulation that was 'legalized' at the same time where executive compensation was moved from salary to... stock, so that you end up with a quasi-legal (stock manipulation by executives is supposed to be illegal) corrupt incentives system.
- quickthrowman 2y agoTwo things: -Stock buybacks are not manipulation, they’re simply a way to return cash to shareholders and then the shareholder decides when to incur tax liability. A company is well within its rights to issue additional shares or buy back and destroy shares at their discretion. It’s functionally equivalent to a dividend without a taxable event. -Corporate boards award stock grants to executives because they want management to be aligned with shareholders. I think executive compensation is excessive, but stock grants do align management and shareholders.
- chipsrafferty 2y agoDilution is immoral and unfair to investors. If a company wants to raise money they should have to sell shares they own, not print more and sell those.
- l33t7332273 2y agoI think it’s kind of up to the investors what is unfair for them.
- quickthrowman 2y agoThat is your opinion and does not reflect reality.
- _DeadFred_ 2y agoIf it's intent is to manipulate the value of the stock, then it is stock manipulation. You give a distinction without a difference.
- scarface_74 2y agoThe company is giving money back to shareholders. What exactly is wrong with that?
- _DeadFred_ 2y agoIt is not. It is manipulating the value of the stock, which the shareholders can possible take advantage of by selling their stock. Giving money back to shareholders is called a dividend. Manipulating the price of a stock is manipulation, not returning money.
- scarface_74 2y agoWhat’s the practical difference? Either way the amount that ends up in your brokerage account should increase be the same amount. Stock buybacks are more tax efficient for the stock owner in the US
- trompetenaccoun 2y agoI just used the exact prompt they give as an example and got the very spam they claimed to have removed. Vice, The Independent, Healthline, etc... all advertising those gummies in ads disguised as news articles. So yeah, probably not actually rendered useless.
- 12907835202 2y agoIs healthline spam? It's my go to whenever I have a medical question to add healthline to the search