736
Fair question
(lemmy.today)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2024
736 points (98.5% liked)
Microblog Memes
5778 readers
899 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
What the hell makes you think they wouldn't exploit it _regardless_of they thought they could get away with it? Diamonds are a limited but abundant resource and look how much the industry has inflated their price. Enough that if Russia decided to flood the market their entire bullshit business model would collapse. So if Netflix could somehow open enough of the popcorn industry then they would absolutely charge more for it. Any company would. That's how capitalism is designed to work.
As soon as you have bought the popcorn/ diamonds no one cares who is going to consume them as a movie snack. So you always will be allowed to share your popcorn/ diamonds with your peers without legal repercussions, which is my point.
You are not wrong with the things you said. But I talked about virtual and real goods and the attached exploitation rules. And you talked about marketing and supply/ demand rules. And I fail to get the connection between those.
Is it (the lack of) morality and opportunism on the supplier's side? Help?