Makes sense. They have multiple franchises and they can either sell in Walmart and water down the franchise or make an exclusive store where they control the experience and increase the value of the products. Disney also has stores like that. As for the Squid Game experience it’s the local equivalent to Disney parks. Di’s I mention it looks like they’re copying Disney?
Same, but Disney has gotten so big and so loose with it’s cash that they are burning the clothes off their backs to keep the train moving. It was just not profitable enough to keep that arm alive I guess
The entire chain of Disney stores in the UK closed years ago. A bunch of other narrowly branded shops have gone too.
If the likes of Disney didn’t think stores were worth it, I’m not sure how Netflix thinks it could work. There’s can be decent margin on merchandise, but also a lot of cost in running physical retail.
How does this work with the way these delivery apps work?
Correct me if I’m wrong since I’ve never worked for one of these outfits, but the way I understood it was anytime you want to work you just log into the app and make yourself available, and you randomly get assigned nearby jobs. If there are no jobs to do (middle of the night or w/e), then you get no pay. With this change, when are you eligible for the minimum wage? If everyone in NYC logs into the app at once, will everyone get minimum wage?
I don’t see how this doesn’t kill business for these companies.
Edit: I’m not defending the decision not to pay people more in general. It’s more about the service going away altogether because the wage cost will be passed into the customers. But if that’s what you fuckers want ok. I don’t live in NY so it doesn’t affect me. Enjoy losing access to all your delivery services.
Normally I wouldn’t give a shit. But for these P2P businesses the unit economics for the business to be profitable requires passing on that expense to the end customer.
I’m not going to pay an extra $10+ dollars or whatever for my meal when I’m already tipping, paying tax, and service charge.
So I’m saying while it sounds awesome to pay people more, in this case it will just cause these services to go away.
Everyone down voted me like I’m defending the companies, but that’s not my intention. It’s more that these services as they are won’t exist, so everyone loses. The employees lose the job and their customers lose the service. The company goes out of business too but that’s not the issue I care about. We will effectively all lose delivery services except those willing to pay a lot for it, which stifles demand and makes the problem worse.
Anyway… I’m totally willing to hear counterarguments and certainly on the side of the workers, but the knee-jerk downvote and talk about how everyone needs a living wage isn’t helping dive into the nuance of how these businesses operate and make money and what impact this decision will have on the business model.
Capitalism requires regulation. If you don’t have regulation you can only have capitalism for an incredibly short amount of time. This was all detailed in Adam Smith’s book when he invented capitalism.
Lemmy seems to dream up this strawman of Capitalism while having a very rose tinted outlook on Communism. Everyone seems to miss that these are all problems with humans, not your favorite economic system.
Especially if it’s a service. Maybe if your service business can’t generate enough revenue to pay your employees then it’s a service that doesn’t need to exist?
They can make less profit in order to cover paying employees a fair wage.
They will still be make a profit, which means all of their business expenses are covered. Those who pocket that profit will also be richer than you can ever hope to be.
I don’t see how this doesn’t kill business for these companies.
That’s because you don’t know what you’re talking about.
I vaguely remember a TV movie from like… 2006 where some kind of solar storm /coronal mass ejection thing happens right as some hacker was trying to “HEY EVERYONE THIS SYSTEM IS VULNERABLE AND YOU SHOULD DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT BEFORE A BAD GUY TAKES CONTROL” type hack of the electrical grid, and the combination of the hack and solar radiation causing most of the US power grid to shut down
I haven’t seen anything in real life to convince me the power gris isn’t a prince ruperts drop that only works because it’s never been shut down all at once before, and once it does that tail shatters and takes the rest with it.
In fact, living near a power substation that supplies a couple major things for a nearby city, I’m convinced the only reason there hasn’t been a massive attack against it is because people just assume it’s well protected.
This is pathetic. Why send death threats because a company made a change to their product. Why are these people so entitled? Or maybe they just know there are no consequences to their actions so they behave in a shitty manner. If you don’t like the changes then use a different product.
First time on the internet? That’s all they do and swat people which results in real deaths. This isn’t anything new, same ol vile behavior that police do handle and do punish for because phone lines are not secure.
Starting today, those who receive a warning for violating the community guidelines will be able to take a training course designed to help them better understand how to steer clear of uploading videos that run afoul of YouTube’s regulations.
If they violate the policy for which they received the warning a second time in that roughly three-month window, YouTube will remove the video in question and slap the creator with a dreaded strike (which can jeopardize their chances of making a living from the platform).
YouTube started dishing out one-time warnings in 2019 for a first rule break, which it says offered “creators the chance to review what went wrong before facing more penalties” (i.e. strikes).
Nonetheless, YouTube says creators told the team “they want more resources to better understand how we draw our policy lines” and this new approach is geared toward that greater transparency.
“We ultimately want creators to have the clarity they need to stay strike free on our platform — while maintaining a healthy experience for YouTube’s entire community.”
Offering YouTubers a chance to learn and grow from their mistakes is a net positive even if some bad actors might try to abuse the system by deliberately uploading a few videos that cross the line each year.
The original article contains 511 words, the summary contains 211 words. Saved 59%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
engadget.com
Top