Founder of 23andMe buys back company out of bankruptcy auction
Technology
58
Beiträge
41
Kommentatoren
0
Aufrufe
-
You make a good point that the shareholder/business owner class is more likely to have better safety nets. So from that standpoint, if the absolute value of their loss is greater, it could have a much less significant impact on their lives.
I think you may be underestimating the amount of small businesses though, at least in the US.
For most shareholders in most businesses, the risk is that you are no longer as rich as your peers.
Most US households can't weather a $1000 unexpected expense without going into debt.
To be real, capital gains are the definition of inequality. It is making money by having enough money to own something. There is no other economic force that drives inequality more.
Small business is a decent minority of US employers. It can't be ignored, but it is the unlikely case when sampling by employee or just by random citizen.
At most an owner can be reimbursed for their costs of starting the business. Past that I don't see any reason to give them a special share of the profits. Even that feels generous given how unequal we are, and that fact that having the money to start a business means you are likely more privileged than your employees.
-
A little searching finds only one company that really fits the bill. Costco has a market cap of $433B and had a reported $14.8B cash on hand as of May 11. That's an interesting possibility that I wouldn't have guessed. Costco is less evil than most big corporations, so that's a little hopeful if I got it right.
Oracle comes close with a market cap of $583B. That's indeed over $400B, but that would make the description a bit weird. In any case, Oracle makes more sense from a business angle. Unfortunately, they are near the top of the evil scale.
Calling it here, Costco is going to use the genetic information to create the perfect hot dog.
-
Calling it here, Costco is going to use the genetic information to create the perfect hot dog.
Costco already creates the perfect hotdog.
I say they should invest in bringing back the Polish dog. That was fucking delicious.
-
Ah dang you did point it out. They even just copied the top comment there, unless they are ColdWetDog.
At least they quoted it.
-
Ok so I think I'm the first person in the comments to actually click to read the article, cause I'm gonna say something I'm not seeing.
How did you get it to auto snap to the article comment section?
Didnt realize you could share that and it wouldn't default to the article.Some webpages have a bad habit of automatically appending tags to the URL, or outright changing it, as you scroll down.
-
Calling it here, Costco is going to use the genetic information to create the perfect hot dog.
Soylent dogs
-
This post did not contain any content.
All your DNA just got bought.
-
I bet there's far more cases of homeless and suicide due to a lost job than due to a shareholder losing value in one company's stock.
put it into actual numbers, not just playing on emotions
-
This post did not contain any content.
So glad I never did this one.
-
Calling it here, Costco is going to use the genetic information to create the perfect hot dog.
Membership is going to be linked to your DNA, the register will prick your finger to make sure you're valid.
-
Membership is going to be linked to your DNA, the register will prick your finger to make sure you're valid.
It’s almost certainly Oracle but there’s a slight possibility this is correct
-
It's not a great business model if you think about it. Customers pay a small fee once then never again.
When did selling a product instead of a subscription become a bad business model?
-
Calling it here, Costco is going to use the genetic information to create the perfect hot dog.
If it costs $1.51 I'm gonna flip shit.
-
put it into actual numbers, not just playing on emotions
What does, "I bet..." mean to you? You're welcome to find some numbers if you know how to evaluate P values, it was an expression but hell, name the price of the bet. Lol
-
All your DNA just got bought.
Bought back by the one person who already had prior access, and bought by her own research non-profit. As far as privacy concerns go, that's the best case scenario.
-
When did selling a product instead of a subscription become a bad business model?
When quarterly profits must always be green compared to the previous quarter.
-
When did selling a product instead of a subscription become a bad business model?
Selling a product is a good business model if the product has a shelf life or naturally degrades over time, but served you so well that you'll replace it in kind or with an upgrade.
A product that does something exactly once and done doesn't scale long term, so once the hype was over, that was that.
-
When did selling a product instead of a subscription become a bad business model?
When it's an inexpensive product that nobody ever has a reason to buy twice yet remains an ongoing cost for the company? (They keep the data available for review and continue to update it with useful information as knowledge of genetic traits and lineages grows). That's not a way to build an ongoing cash flow to cover expenses. Especially when all the people inclined to be interested have already purchased.
