Would it be "extortion" if I tell the person who cuts my hair that I'll only go back to her post-COVID if she charged me $10 instead of $20? It would be an awkward conversation, sure. And she would like say "no" but how is that worse than what I'll probably do which is simply never see her again (paying her $0) since I've learned to cut my own hair. If the landlords don't like the offer Apple is making, they can tell Apple to shove off when the leases expire. They don't have to be happy about the negotiating power Apple may or may not have, but that doesn't make it "extortion." (Caveat: if Apple said something along the lines of "if you don't lower our rent we will break your legs and murder your children," then I apologize: that is extortion.)
Would it be "extortion" if I tell the person who cuts my hair that I'll only go back to her post-COVID if she charged me $10 instead of $20? It would be an awkward conversation, sure. And she would like say "no" but how is that worse than what I'll probably do which is simply never see her again (paying her $0) since I've learned to cut my own hair. If the landlords don't like the offer Apple is making, they can tell Apple to shove off when the leases expire. They don't have to be happy about the negotiating power Apple may or may not have, but that doesn't make it "extortion." (Caveat: if Apple said something along the lines of "if you don't lower our rent we will break your legs and murder your children," then I apologize: that is extortion.)
(Pssst... I’ve been cutting my own hair for years. Saves me a lot of money.)
Rent is being cut for companies that are struggling and likely to go under without a cut, clothing stores, grocery stores etc. Apple isn't going to go under: they just reported record revenue while a lot of high street names are making heavy losses (and still paying more than Apple in tax). Even some malls are financially struggling, there's no way they can afford a 50% cut.
Apple's morals really seem to be in the gutter lately. This is a case of the big guy bullying the little guy. Several companies didn't take the government's furlough subsidy and paid employees out of their own pockets, but from what I've read Apple took the government subsidy despite being barely affected by the lockdowns. For a company I've supported for 25 years, this kind of thing is a big kick in the teeth and incredibly disappointing to read.
Such twaddle. Business is business. If you can get concessions from your suppliers (or landlords) that’s what you do. And Apple’s landlords are fabulously wealthy already, no need to worry about them or Apple’s “morals”. Apple is offering to extend leases in return for lower rent. Sounds like a win-win to me.
Translation: "It's dog eat dog, survival of the fittest!"
It always surprises me how those with no morals, ethics or values can rationalize depraved corruption.
They think the world is comprised solely of sharks and treat it that way -- but then have to make up excuses to justify their actions when challenged with the reality that people, governments and corporations who survive long term typically operate from a set of values and morals that guide their actions.
Sorry, but extortion is still extortion and it is still wrong no matter who does it.
And what, exactly, is Apple extorting? The landlords can refuse the request can they not? Apple can stay or leave when their lease is up can they not? The landlords can find new tenants can they not? Apple stores are in prime retail spaces and the properties they lease are in great demand. Apple has spent millions of dollars renovating these properties to make the areas attractive. Other tenants in the area benefit from the cachet of Apple’s presence with more foot traffic and sales.
But there is no discussion with a closed, socialist mind like yours who sees things only in the black or white light of undefined “fairness”. And you accuse conservatives of being closed minded? Yet earlier you admitted profiting from the very evilness you constantly decry to buy a new car. Doesn’t that bring your own morals into question? Instead of buying a car should you not have donated that profit to one of your socialist causes?
LOL... Yes, the extorted can always refuse to be extorted. That makes for a good excuse.
And yes, as I said, I profited from Trump's mismanagement of the virus. I have been fortunate in life and earned enough to benefit from his trickle down economic theories. But, having money and investments does not mean that I have to give up my moral, ethics and values nor does it mean I have any reason to ignore reality that this country is being split between the haves and the have nots.
Suppose Apple had a long-term contract with a company who supplies gas (petrol) to their (hypothetical) fleet of cars/shuttles for employees. When the contract was negotiated for a (hypothetical) 3-year year the market prices for gas was $2.50 and Apple got a "deal" at $2.40. Now suppose a year into the contract the market price of gas is $1.50. There is nothing wrong with Apple reaching out to it's supplier with a proposal to scrap the remaining 2 years at $2.40 for a 5 year deal at $1.75. This is all hypothetical, but it's exactly what's Apple's being "accused" of doing with these landlords. They aren't "threatening" to renege on their existing deal, they are simply offering to negotiate a new deal within the context of a major drop in the commercial real estate market. Why should Apple do anything else?
And this has absolutely nothing to with with how much taxes Apple pays or how much profit it made. The market price is the market price and Apple is right to react to changes.
So its OK for Apple to break contracts and throw its mighty weight around against the small fry? Got it!
Suppose Apple had a long-term contract with a company who supplies gas (petrol) to their (hypothetical) fleet of cars/shuttles for employees. When the contract was negotiated for a (hypothetical) 3-year year the market prices for gas was $2.50 and Apple got a "deal" at $2.40. Now suppose a year into the contract the market price of gas is $1.50. There is nothing wrong with Apple reaching out to it's supplier with a proposal to scrap the remaining 2 years at $2.40 for a 5 year deal at $1.75. This is all hypothetical, but it's exactly what's Apple's being "accused" of doing with these landlords. They aren't "threatening" to renege on their existing deal, they are simply offering to negotiate a new deal within the context of a major drop in the commercial real estate market. Why should Apple do anything else?
And this has absolutely nothing to with with how much taxes Apple pays or how much profit it made. The market price is the market price and Apple is right to react to changes.
So its OK for Apple to break contracts and throw its mighty weight around against the small fry? Got it!
If both parties agree to break the contract, then yes, it's OK. As for throwing the weight around... I'm not a fan of it, but it happens. And if you want to get in the ring with a heavyweight there is at least some onus on you to know what you're doing and expect the consequences of a mismatch.
Suppose Apple had a long-term contract with a company who supplies gas (petrol) to their (hypothetical) fleet of cars/shuttles for employees. When the contract was negotiated for a (hypothetical) 3-year year the market prices for gas was $2.50 and Apple got a "deal" at $2.40. Now suppose a year into the contract the market price of gas is $1.50. There is nothing wrong with Apple reaching out to it's supplier with a proposal to scrap the remaining 2 years at $2.40 for a 5 year deal at $1.75. This is all hypothetical, but it's exactly what's Apple's being "accused" of doing with these landlords. They aren't "threatening" to renege on their existing deal, they are simply offering to negotiate a new deal within the context of a major drop in the commercial real estate market. Why should Apple do anything else?
And this has absolutely nothing to with with how much taxes Apple pays or how much profit it made. The market price is the market price and Apple is right to react to changes.
So its OK for Apple to break contracts and throw its mighty weight around against the small fry? Got it!
If both parties agree to break the contract, then yes, it's OK. As for throwing the weight around... I'm not a fan of it, but it happens. And if you want to get in the ring with a heavyweight there is at least some onus on you to know what you're doing and expect the consequences of a mismatch.
Yeh, shit does happen. That's why there are anti-trust laws. The industrial barons of 100 years ago did much good for this country -- until they began misusing the power of their positions.
Comments
Yeh, shit does happen. That's why there are anti-trust laws. The industrial barons of 100 years ago did much good for this country -- until they began misusing the power of their positions.