• OpenStars@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    9 小时前

    They have no incentive to care about the product they’re offering because they couldn’t care less about it.

    I think it’s kinda even worse: they’ll take a good product and actively make it worse, so it’s not mere indifference to it but active hatred towards the wants of the customers, in contrast to the desires of the Board.

    Like why change a perfectly good logo? If it serves its purpose, then leave it alone?! But no, line must go up, and even if changing the logo makes it go down, then oh well…

    • Powderhorn@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      8 小时前

      Golden parachute time! They can take some time off while figuring out what to fuck up next.

    • ignirtoq@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 小时前

      The thing is it’s been like that forever. Good products made by small- to medium-sized businesses have always attracted buyouts where the new owner basically converts the good reputation of the original into money through cutting corners, laying off critical workers, and other strategies that slowly (or quickly) make the product worse. Eventually the formerly good product gets bad enough there’s space in the market for an entrepreneur to introduce a new good product, and the cycle repeats.

      I think what’s different now is, since this has gone on unabated for 70+ years, economic inequality means the people with good ideas for products can’t afford to become entrepreneurs anymore. The market openings are there, but the people that made everything so bad now have all the money. So the cycle is broken not by good products staying good, but by bad products having no replacements.