The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

Re:The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble by ryanwaggoner on Thursday February 15, 2018 @11:48PM (#16389946)

This is a classic red herring, totally unrelated.

If anything, that undermines the point I'm arguing against: why would these companies feel any need to collude to suppress wages if they could get better performance just by hiring cheaper workers?

Also, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon, Netflix, etc. weren't part of this suit, so again, not relevant.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble by cowpig on Friday February 16, 2018 @01:48AM (#16390417)

I think it's more like:

person who really wants the job but is kind of underqualified > person who is highly qualified, but doesn't really want the job (unless the money is right)

edit: I'll add that, for CEOs who should all look amazing on paper and know how to sell themselves, maybe willingness to do the job for less than market is a better signal than most

[ Parent | on HN ]