3 ms·
Because it could be strategically good to increase their market share and loyalty when everyone else is increasing their prices, for instance? But no, the "fidu
by matsemann 4mo ago
Because it could be strategically good to increase their market share and loyalty when everyone else is increasing their prices, for instance? But no, the "fiduciary duty" thing trumps everything, I guess.
- sokoloff 4mo agoApple is free to make either choice (or anywhere on the spectrum) without violating any duty they have to shareholders. “We chose to invest in future market share, believing that was in the best interest of the company” is a perfectly valid choice for the company leaders and board to make.
- alt227 4mo agoWe are only talking about opinion here. Obviously Apple shareholders have their own and thats what they use to direct the company, thats fine. My opinion would be more along the lines of 'Lets sacrifice 1% of profit this year to gain huge chunks of market share by undercutting literally everybody else in the industry for the first time in our history'.
- inlined 4mo agoBut Apple has always made their image quality not cost effectiveness. Pivoting here too drastically could sacrifice their image and backfire
- alt227 4mo agoFair enough. I had the same opinion when they released the neo. In 3-4 years time there are going to be absolutely loads of them looking shabby and tired and running very slowly. Apple has been so careful over the past 3 decades to avoid that image, I'm surprised they are happy to go down that road now.