News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Amazon Used Secret ‘Project Nessie’ Algorithm to Raise Prices. Parent comment

Re:Amazon Used Secret ‘Project Nessie’ Algorithm to Raise Pr... by lazide on Tuesday October 03, 2023 @06:38PM (#37758559)
A CEO or board of directors that angers the majority of shareholders (or an outspoken minority) doesn’t last long. That correlation is absolutely clear.

Which means most CEOs and boards focus on managing shareholders at least as much as anything else they do.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Amazon Used Secret ‘Project Nessie’ Algorithm to Raise Pr... by AgentOrange1234 on Tuesday October 03, 2023 @07:06PM (#37758783)
I agree. Unfortunately the majority of shareholders are rich dudes who just care about their numbers going up. The whole thing is psychopathic.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Amazon Used Secret ‘Project Nessie’ Algorithm to Raise Pr... by lazide on Tuesday October 03, 2023 @07:24PM (#37758917)
They certainly wouldn’t be rich dudes for long if they were okay with the numbers going down!
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Amazon Used Secret ‘Project Nessie’ Algorithm to Raise Pr... by gruez on Tuesday October 03, 2023 @09:08PM (#37759697)
What do you suggest we optimize for instead? "their numbers going up" is at least objective.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Amazon Used Secret ‘Project Nessie’ Algorithm to Raise Pr... by scarface_74 on Tuesday October 03, 2023 @09:14PM (#37759733)
Everyone who has money in the stock market via their retirement funds care if the stock goes up
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Amazon Used Secret ‘Project Nessie’ Algorithm to Raise Pr... by feetsoup on Wednesday October 04, 2023 @03:09AM (#37761823)
THEIR numbers going up, is the part you may be overlooking in that.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Amazon Used Secret ‘Project Nessie’ Algorithm to Raise Pr... by lazide on Wednesday October 04, 2023 @11:16AM (#37766402)
Care to clarify?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Amazon Used Secret ‘Project Nessie’ Algorithm to Raise Pr... by feetsoup on Thursday October 05, 2023 @12:41AM (#37774965)
I'm assuming the person I replied to was insinuating that the people with an influential amount of voting stock are adequate representatives of the interests of small fry investors building up for retirement. My response is that if the former has the option to increase their share of wealth at the expense of the latter (like rearranging the leadership in a way that promotes short term gain at the expense of long term gain), they will take it. They're interested in their numbers, not any particular company, or the health of the market, or retirees.

Thank you for asking for clarification. I realize I responded precipitously and was too cryptic to contribute anything meaningful to the discussion.

[ Parent | on HN ]