• @PersonalDevKit@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      70
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      The stock price will fall if we don’t make more money then we did last year.

      • But why?

      Because we are legally obliged to do what is best for shareholder, or they can sue us.

      • Right so the company needs to make more money again and again and again until the company or the world dies

      About sums it up

      • @Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        112 years ago

        Accurate. The laws need to find a balance as I get shareholders who took a risk on business would like to see a return, but it is way too slanted to the point that the risk is on our entire society. We need people to be in those laws not just shareholders.

      • @pufferfischerpulver@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        8
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        I think it’s a great idea in theory. Basically a form of decentralised loans. You need money to invest, you sell shares of your company to get some cash. In return the shareholders get a return if you succeed. And of course they can sell their shares if now your company is worth more. Seems alright with me tbh.

        But nowadays it just seems like a fucking casino.

        • Franklin
          link
          fedilink
          English
          72 years ago

          I don’t know if you can have that ideology without it eventually turning into what it currently is.

          • @pufferfischerpulver@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 years ago

            I’m by now means an expert. So I asked the old CharlieGPT

            This list seems pretty good to me though:

            Transforming the stock market from its current state, which many perceive as being overly speculative, to a more stable and purposeful system would be challenging. However, here are some suggestions that could help mitigate its “casino-like” nature:

            1. Limit High-Frequency Trading (HFT): HFT can exacerbate market volatility. Some argue it provides liquidity, while others feel it allows for manipulation. By setting limits or additional regulations on HFT, you might reduce some of the rapid, short-term fluctuations.

            2. Enhance Financial Education: Educating the public about the fundamental analysis of companies, rather than speculative trading, can lead to a more informed investor base that makes decisions based on a company’s intrinsic value, not short-term price movements.

            3. Tax Incentives for Long-Term Holding: Offer tax benefits for long-term investments. For example, increase capital gains tax for stocks held less than a year and reduce it for those held longer. This would incentivize investors to think long-term.

            4. Increase Transparency: Companies could be required to disclose more about their financial health and business operations, making it easier for investors to make informed decisions.

            5. Reduce Leverage: Limit the amount of leverage retail investors can use. Excessive borrowing to buy stocks can magnify gains but also amplify losses, leading to more volatile markets.

            6. Strengthen Short-Selling Regulations: While short-selling can be a useful tool for price discovery, unrestricted or manipulative shorting can destabilize markets. Strengthening regulations and increasing transparency around short positions might help.

            7. Limit Derivatives or Complex Financial Products: Overly complex financial products can mask risk. By limiting or more strictly regulating these products, one might reduce systemic risks.

            8. Robust Regulatory Oversight: Enhance the powers and resources of regulatory bodies to monitor market manipulations, insider trading, and other unethical practices.

            9. Circuit Breakers: Strengthen and refine circuit breakers, which are mechanisms that temporarily halt trading on an exchange during significant declines for predefined periods.

            10. Restrict Speculative Products for Retail Investors: Limit access to highly speculative or complex products for inexperienced retail investors.

            11. Promote Stakeholder Capitalism: Shift the focus from purely shareholder returns to considering other stakeholders, such as employees, the community, and the environment. This can encourage companies to think long-term and align their strategies with broader societal benefits.

            12. Enhanced Shareholder Rights: Grant shareholders more power in corporate decision-making, making it easier for them to hold company executives accountable.

            Remember, the stock market serves as a crucial mechanism for companies to raise capital and for investors to grow wealth over time. Any regulations or reforms should be considered carefully to ensure they do not stifle innovation or economic growth.

            • Franklin
              link
              fedilink
              English
              2
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              Those sound like a great ideas, although I have to question the immense burden it would put on any governing authority, still seems better than the current system though.

              As a counterpoint, stock markets (or any structured form of capital investment) require infinite growth, not only is this unsustainable, but it will always prioritize the profit motive over ethical concerns.

              In addition, in a market where capital controls expansion, it will always benefit those with capital and by extension power to loosen those regulations.

              To summarize, regulation will win you the battle but never the war.

        • J Lou
          link
          fedilink
          0
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          It isn’t a great idea even in theory. Even ideally, workers inalienable rights to appropriate the fruits of their labor and to democracy are still violated. These rights flow from the moral principle that legal and de facto responsibility should match. In a company, employees are jointly de facto responsible for using up the inputs to produce the outputs, but receive 0% of property rights and liabilities. The employer is held solely legally responsible resulting in a mismatch

    • @Slotos@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Tissue. A cancer tissue.

      Cells are expendable in pursuit of infinite growth.

    • andrew
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 years ago

      Also fire.

      “OH MY GOD! WE’RE HAVING A FIRE… Sale.”

  • @Cephirux@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1062 years ago

    Please vote with your money. Don’t waste money and buy overpriced stuff and certainly don’t support this kind of business practice. And fuck the shareholders too. If they want money, then work like most people.

    • @burliman@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      212 years ago

      Already do. Used to buy new phone every year. Now it’s every three years or so. That is completely due to price and lack of compelling innovation. Don’t care if shareholders make money or not. I just like good value.

      • @M500@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        112 years ago

        I’m the same. I just got a 15 as my xr screen is cracked and the batter lasts half a day.

        I’m home sick and didn’t even open the box yet.

        I’m not particularly excited for a new phone, but my xr is just not working well enough any longer.

      • oce 🐆
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 years ago

        You can try 5 years with Fairphones, it’s the length of their warranty and you can repair it yourself easily.

      • @Cephirux@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        8
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Is this sarcasm? I don’t think I’m a genius, just giving a reminder, and perhaps pointing a flaw in capitalism.

  • @Un4@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    732 years ago

    I do not understand all the rage, Apple does not provide any vital services or products. They can charge anything they want. If you don’t like it then don’t buy it.

      • @jmankman@lemmy.myserv.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        If it’s “always” then it’s not a “trend.” Maybe if there is “always” rage at Apple, there is a good reason for it.

        • @HollandJim@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Yeah. For some, hate is eternal.

          It’s supposed to be a personal computer - some folks don’t respect personal choices.

    • @morgunkorn@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      222 years ago

      but you still lock yourself in their offer space when you also bought devices that kind of depend on those services: music streaming for the homepod, fitness+ for watch, cloud storage for iphone photos…

      every time you switch from apple to a third party, it’s ever so slightly less convenient, and they probably conceive their products around that notion.

      • @offbyone@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        122 years ago

        Yes you have to decide if the cost of the convenience is worth the lock in and price of Apple products. At the end of the day you still have a choice.

      • @Syntha@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        92 years ago

        That is their business model, no? The convenience and integration of their products is what makes Apple unique. Seems weird hold it against them.

      • @SmashingSquid@notyour.rodeo
        link
        fedilink
        English
        32 years ago

        None of the products that had the price increased are locked in. Apple TV plus doesn’t even need an Apple device and has many competitors, Apple News has plenty of competitors, there are games you can buy without Apple Arcade though most do stupid in app purchases.

    • @OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      362 years ago

      One of the biggest drawbacks of buying iOS devices is you can’t leave. I swap everything out on my laptop and phones as needed, but on iOS you’re stuck with Apple’s app store, Apple’s operating system, oftentimes Apple hardware, and there’s nothing you can do about it. It simply ends up being so expensive.

      • Pyro
        link
        fedilink
        English
        762 years ago

        It might feel that way, but people switch from one platform the other all the time.

        It’s not impossible, just inconvenient. People nowadays often seem to conflate the two.

      • @JasSmith@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        122 years ago

        They do a great job of integrating devices. As for the App Store, us in the EU will soon be allowed to install alternatives. I think the deadline is the end of March.

      • @IHaveTwoCows@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        I have a Mac Mini because I like Logic and GarageBand DAWs, but outside of that I dont have anything to do with Apple stuff.

  • @Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    552 years ago

    The solution is simple: Don’t participate in the Church of Steve Jobs, don’t turn yourself into an Apple disciple (and apologist).

  • Ghostalmedia
    link
    fedilink
    English
    522 years ago

    I can get the TV+ hike. I don’t like it, but I get it. When TV+ launched it had very little content and no one was going to pay for that little content unless it was cheap. But now there is a pretty good library of new stuff, and it’s usually of better quality than what’s floating around on HBO.

    Arcade price hikes - now that seems like a good reason to cancel Arcade. If they’re going to add better games that take advantage of the new fast processors, I can understand console tier pricing. But the games still mostly feel like mobile games. And not mobile as in “Nintendo Switch,” mobile as in “flappy bird.”

    • @slaacaa@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      282 years ago

      The logic is that others raised subscription prices and got away with it, so they can too. Masks have come off in the last 1-2 years and corporations try to milk us for every last cent, using any excuse (e.g. Covid, energy prices) they can. Inflation is not a law of nature, it’s corporate greed for more profits

      • @IHaveTwoCows@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        I am subscribed to Max because I’m a stupid fucking DC nerd as well as a Studio Ghibli weaboo shithead. I am slightly ashamed

        • @Krauerking@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 years ago

          I’m so excited for that… But that’s definitely Williams St/Titmouse before the merger being awesome as usual with discovering new talent.

      • @hyperhopper@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        402 years ago

        Very untrue. Consumers have the power to buy far cheaper Android phones where they have far more freedoms, but not only do the majority of American consumers refuse to do this, they voluntarily and systematically shame those who do.

        Statistically, Most American consumers are pretty dumb and act against their own interests

      • roguetrick
        link
        fedilink
        182 years ago

        Workers and consumers actually have all the power, they just don’t want to inconvenience themselves by using it. Collective action has destroyed empires and absolutely can annihilate multinationals.

    • @woobie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      82 years ago

      I am so happy that I’m not the only one that thought Apple Jacks were vastly more profitable than I had expected.

    • @LostWon@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Or juice “profits.” (I’ve never understood people having cereal with juice, but maybe it works with Apple Jacks.)

  • @ky56@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    352 years ago

    The thing I loved about Apple 15+ years ago was that even though the hardware was expensive, it was semi modular and tightly integrated with the software and you got an offline product that you could also buy Apple server equipment and software for. 10 years ago was still ok but things were starting to erode.

    These days there is no server software, no modularity, no ways to use enough of the new features without a cloud subscription and the hardware is just as expensive and designed with defects to limit it’s lifespan (in my opinion). They want to have their cake and eat it too. I was a proud Apple fan boy but not a blind one. Well now they can fuck off. Bye.

    I’m now fanboying about Framework and Pine64.

    • Semi-Hemi-Demigod
      link
      fedilink
      162 years ago

      Apple’s been ignoring professional users for a while now. Folks in sound and video production were the ones who kept them alive in the 90s. But they turned Final Cut Pro into iMovie+ and their professional machines are impossible to upgrade or repair.

      Remember the outrigger cases? Or the G3/G4? Beautiful design, great airflow, and one latch and the whole thing opened up.

      • @jaschen@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        Remembering the G3 and G4s had daughterboards? So you can not only change out the memory, but also change out the CPU/GPU. It was a great time to be an Apple fan back then.

        • Semi-Hemi-Demigod
          link
          fedilink
          12 years ago

          Yeah! IIRC there were even daughterboards with full Intel systems on them so you could run Windows/DOS applications

          • @jaschen@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 years ago

            Oh ya!!! You could swap the IBM board or the Cirrix board. Oh man. Blast from the past.

    • @jaschen@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 years ago

      Was also a fanboy 15+ years ago. First they got rid of the Macbook 17". Then they got started soldering memory to the motherboard. Thats when I left. It just got progressively worse ever since.

  • @oxjox@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    332 years ago

    I’ve been an Apple loyalist since 1993. Practically everything I’ve loved about the company has gone to shit in the past few years. It used to be inspirational, seamless, intuitive. Now every new OS update makes something needlessly complex and confusing.
    On top of that, they’re increasing prices for their services. I genuinely love Apple TV+ and still think with the increase that it’s an incredible deal. Still, they can suck a dick if they think I’m falling prey to this annual price increase bullshit. Apple stopped being an industry leader under Cook and became a basic vanilla consumer electronics and digital services company. It’s fucking disappointing.
    What’s worse, they still do most things better than the competition so there’s little to do but hope things don’t break and disable auto updates. I have nearly every product category they put out but as things start to fail, I will not be replacing them. Instead, I’ll simply choose a more simple life without excessive tech.

    • HiddenRetro
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 years ago

      I have thought about doing this in the past. I eat, sleep and breath technology and also work in the field so I feel it would be difficult for me to make this transition.

  • @Smoogs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    32
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    They are epitome of passive aggressive capitalism. “Will keep doin unethical shit til they make a law not to and even then you have to sue me to make me stop”

    It’s nestle’s MO.