- Last Active
davidw said:So are you also suggesting that since Costco sell their own Kirkland brand of bath tissue and papers towels, the makers of the likes of Charmin and Bounty should not have to pay Costco anything to be able to compete, by having free access to Costco paying membership customers in Costco own warehouse store?
What about Walmart? Walmart sell dozens of their own brand products, that are often less expensive than the competition. So should all makers of competing products be able to sell their products on Walmart shelves and not compensate Walmart in doing so? This to "level the playing field", so competing product makers can better compete with Walmart, in a Walmart?
Walmart, Target, Costco, Macy's, and all the other B&M stores are resellers. They buy the items from the manufacture or wholesaler (and yes, I realize there are accounting hoops that in many cases result in them not actually paying for the goods until after they resell them), then resell them. Apple doesn't do that. Apple is a consignment shop, not a retailer. They sell products on behalf of others, they don't sell products they own.
I'm not sure how much my opinion is going to change yet, or even if it will. It's still Apple's infrastructure that's making the whole thing even possible, and under no circumstances should anyone think that I don't believe Apple deserves just compensation for that. They absolutely do.
crowley said:verne arase said:
Of course, when Intel gets their own fabs up to snuff, you know you'll suffer the double whammy of losing not only the business of fabricating Intel CPUs, but Intel will then try to take as many of your other customers as they can.
What's a body to do ... ?