3 ms·
Probably not. Large corps are willing to bear the costs of maintaining a lot of control over customers just to keep them from being exposed to a competitor. If
by burnte 1y ago
Probably not. Large corps are willing to bear the costs of maintaining a lot of control over customers just to keep them from being exposed to a competitor. If they ever open it up, it'll be due to laws, not change of heart on Apple's part.
- jlarocco 1y agoThe benefits out weight the costs, or at least the people in charge perceive it that way.
- quitit 1y agoThis is a consequence of publicly listed companies. They can't just go and eliminate a giant revenue stream because it would be morally right to do so. They need a court or a law to force them to do it, otherwise the board will be removed from their position for people who will maintain that revenue stream.
- conductr 1y agoNot just that, the demand for growth and improving quarter over quarter results require they continue to expand those revenue streams. Enshittification is a result of inertia.
- burnte 1y agoThey actually can. Fiduciary responsibility does not mean you can only do the most profitable thing and nothing else. You just need leaders willing to do it and a board to agree. Boards and officers are given wide latitude to do what's right, and shareholder suits have a really high bar to pass to prove officers or the board were really wrong. The idea that public corps MUST do everything possible to make a penny is a myth perpetuated by the people who run those large corps and WANT to be evil because it's the most profitable path for them.