News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Company Lays Off 8k While Paying Matthew McConaughey $10M... by notmindthegap on Thursday March 02, 2023 @12:10PM (#34998492)
"Real value" is an attempt to draw a distinction where there isn't one.

Kim Kardashian brings in more "real value" to a clothing company than any one seamstress.

Welcome to marketing.

Re:Company Lays Off 8k While Paying Matthew McConaughey $10M... by anonymouskimmer on Thursday March 02, 2023 @12:15PM (#34998572)
And yet a bad seamstress can tank a clothing company if a single bad article of clothing gets into the wrong hands.

This kind of makes Kim K a safer play than a bad seamstress. As unless you go full Kanye a spokesmodel isn't going to tank a company.

Re:Company Lays Off 8k While Paying Matthew McConaughey $10M... by wongarsu on Thursday March 02, 2023 @12:39PM (#34998964)
A single bad seamstress causing bad clothing to be delivered to customers is a process failure, the same way no single engineer should be responsible for Saleforce's production systems going down. And in most ways, implementing quality control on your product is a lot easier than controlling the personal life of your spokespeople.
Re:Company Lays Off 8k While Paying Matthew McConaughey $10M... by anonymouskimmer on Thursday March 02, 2023 @12:51PM (#34999150)
Any company that's paying $10M to a spokesperson will have (maybe I should say "should have") a lot of employees dedicated to that spokesperson and the campaign. They might have a clawback clause if the spokesperson shows bad judgement, and can also get some additional good marketing if they are proactive in distancing themselves from their Kanye-esque spokesperson.

So I guess, like you say, there is a quality control process regardless.

I think the larger issues are probably the decisions of the pre-seamstress process employees. Bad choices in materials or cost-savings measures can turn off customers.