drewys808

About

Username
drewys808
Joined
Visits
31
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
219
Badges
1
Posts
549

Reactions

111Like4Informative

  • Apple responds to DOJ antitrust lawsuit by refuting every claim

    drewys808drewys808
    avon b7 said:
    drewys808 said:
    avon b7 said:

    The reason being that food and drink isn't the main business of movie theaters. 

    You mean the 35% - 75% of income derived from food/drink/concessions?  Pretty sure you should just concede that point to Blastdoor.  
    Nope. This has already been through the courts here. The movie theaters cannot stop you from bringing your own food and beverages in if they also sell them. 

    They are movie theaters, not food outlets.

    https://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2019/10/16/cinema-in-spain-slapped-with-e3000-fine-for-banning-customers-from-bringing-their-own-food-into-film-screenings/
    I appreciate the info from Spain.  But you seem to moving the goal posts and your reasoning.  Should Gov change laws based on how much revenue is derived from a product?  If my restaurant also sells t shirts and artwork and now my revenue is 80% food/drink must I allow customers to bring in their own food/drink?  You're reaching (randomly) for changes in law to control private businesses... and in this case, the vast majority of customers holistically enjoy and love their experience with the product/service.

    I've said it before and I'll say it again, don't be fooled, this push against Apple is not about consumers, it's about power, control and greed. 
    williamlondontmayteejay2012watto_cobra

  • Apple responds to DOJ antitrust lawsuit by refuting every claim

    drewys808drewys808
    avon b7 said:
    blastdoor

    The reason being that food and drink isn't the main business of movie theaters. 

    You mean the 35% - 75% of income derived from food/drink/concessions?  Pretty sure you should just concede that point to Blastdoor.  
    thttmaydanoxwilliamlondonteejay2012watto_cobra

  • Lobbying group backed by Apple and Google rails against Open App Markets Act

    drewys808drewys808
    Spotify complaining against Apple:
    “Spotify commends Representatives… Apple has used the iOS platform and its App Store policies to insulate itself from competition and disadvantage rivals for far too long.”

    So we want to require all companies to help competition and ensure there is no disadvantage to rivals?

    And don’t even think about the argument that Apple is a monopoly of smart phones. 

    Don’t be fooled, this push against Apple is not about consumers, it’s about power, control and greed.  
    n2itivguywatto_cobrajony0Detnator

  • 'Apple Glass' prototype reportedly enters second stage of production

    drewys808drewys808
    ...merely a spectacle.  
    bikerdudewatto_cobra

  • Warren Buffett educated Tim Cook, Steve Jobs about the benefits of stock buybacks

    drewys808drewys808
    SpamSandwich said:
    Latko said:
    Cook should have better followed Jobs’ track and leave finance to the many professionals Apple has. His companies’ interests are constitutionally different from Berkshire Hataways’
    I agree. Buybacks and dividends are generally a dumb use of cash. They should concentrate on growing the value of the stock with continued profitability and market growth, not engage in accounting tricks to satisfy institutional investors.
    Yes, because Cook made the decision to buy back shares all on his own and he didn’t collaborate at all with his financial/legal/accounting experts.  You see how dumb that sounds?

    And why does anyone think that “financial engineering”, or whatever suboptimal name you want to give it, comes at the destruction of continued profitability or market growth?  Did you even bother to look at the balance sheet?  Apple has cash and is not running out of cash... PLUS what would you use the cash for INSTEAD of buying back shares?  Let me guess, buy Tesla and Netflix and Disney. 

    I’m not disrespecting your opinion, but are you listening to yourselves?
    radarthekat