Just reread what I wrote if you need the answer. Your inability to grasp basic economics and business finances isn't my issue.
Businesses that aren't growing are at a higher risk of failing. Their job is to keep their company growing to the benefit of their employees and stockholders.
Saying because a company is profitable means they don't need to increase prices is genuinely a stupid response.
Whatever you gotta tell yourself to deflect from the fact that your greed is making you upset that you gotta spend 20 extra dollars for a game on release.
But my point is that I think this could backfire on Nintendo.
Regardless, between me and Nintendo, who is more "greedy" for wanting to have an extra $20? Like I'm doing fine financially, but Nintendo's finances dwarf mine obviously.
Not that I'm actually expecting a serious response from you, though. As we've established you're the loser from the meme. Imagine saying I'm deflecting when you can't answer simple questions.
Doesnāt matter. You want to criticize a company for doing their job by saying itās greedy, but the criticisms on this very thread come from a place of greed as well. Doesnāt matter how rich anyone is. A business exchanging a luxury good or service with a customer is 100% greed in all directions. Thereās nothing wrong with people wanting stuff.
Not that I'm actually expecting a serious response from you, though
Uh huh. Because an Adult unironically saying āUr the meme guy!ā Is totally something anyone should take seriously, hm?
No no, I insist. You're the one doing that. Google psychological projection. Pretending to be stupid isn't an argument. If you don't have an actual response, just don't respond.
Oh, so you can arbitrarily limit what I'm allowed to reference what you said after you said it?
you're argument was to ask me fallacious questions to get me to say some variation of "the company is greedy". you don't get to avoid the context of the conversation because you didn't say a word.
Oh, so you can arbitrarily limit what I'm allowed to reference what you said after you said it?
you're argument was to ask me fallacious questions to get me to say some variation of "the company is greedy". you don't get to avoid the context of the conversation because you didn't say a word.
No I already spelled out for you that I think it could backfire. Not that it was greedy.
My original criticism was of you saying it was unsustainable to keep it at $60. I'm questioning you why that is but you're unable to explain that.
It's never been about greed. I think they'll be less profitable when they won't sell as much. We could've had a discussion but you're insufferable so guess not.
4
u/El_Giganto 1d ago
How can something profitable be unsustainable?
Can you give an actual answer this time?