This statement is why "but that's just how things are" is not an answer to a problem. It is indeed an era of rank greed, worse than the 1980s even. That does not mean such an attitude is best, or should continue.
People may try to argue that "it's always been this way" but I would happily argue against them. And win.
Profits are the keystone of capitalism.
Marine51, I would say this: you are correct, but if you do not accurately describe the process, and what you consider "profits," you are likely to excuse a lot of bad behavior under the shield of "but this makes us a profit."
When a business excuses bad behavior simply because that earns them more "profit," who pays the penalty? The customer who bought the bad item made cheaply for "profit," right?
Doesn't the corner-cutter business have the blame here, not the customer?
Also, while you may have assumed "shareholder interests" as paramount, what do you actually know about the history of corporations, shareholder rights, and corporate obligations to shareholders?
What is the role of the shareholder in a corporate structure? How can a shareholder know anything about the process of the business in which shareholder invested?
“ era of rank greed, worse than the 1980s even”
Sounds like a line straight from the dem playbook. “Those evil Greedy corporations”
In my post above I stated: “Cutting corners for short-term gains is not conducive to long-term profits and company/corporate solvency. I can understand criticism of corporate CEO stupidity for making bad decisions that harm the long-term profitability of a company”
Shareholders are the owners of publicly traded companies (PTC’s). They can hire/fire CEO’s, elect board member, and take the company in a new direction at their discretion. Their number one goal is (should be) the long-term profitability of the company. If the CEO is taking the company in a wrong direction and sacrificing company solvency for short-term gains, then it is incumbent on Board of Directors (elected by the shareholders) to correct this.
“How can a shareholder know anything about the process of the business in which shareholder invested?”
What? Would you give your hard-earned money to someone you don’t know or have confidence in?? If you blindly buy stocks in a corporation without doing due diligence research, it is your fault if you lose money.
(BTW, Sig Sauer is NOT a PTC. It is part of L&O Holding which is privately owned by a group of German investors).
“Doesn't the corner-cutter business have the blame here, not the customer?”
In a free market economy, the ultimate vote goes to the consumer. If the product is loosing quality and not meeting consumer needs, buyers go elsewhere. New competitive companies form, resources move to the new more competitive companies.
Now, regarding Sig Sauer, it appears there is a lot of grief from knowledgeable gun owners on this forum regarding the direction Cohen has taken the company. I agree with this. As I said in an above post, I love my old P239 and hate the new striker-fired polymer handguns. I will not buy another new SIG. THAT SAID, it appears there are millions of buyers for these handguns. The owners of Sig Sauer are not likely to change direction with this healthy demand for their product. And why should they ? Big gov contracts coming in and a steady consumer demand. I understand the frustration.
