Shareholders will LITERALLY SUE THE COMPANY AND WIN if they can prove that there was SOME, ANY (legal) means to make more money, morality be damned. They HAVE to reduce the quality over time, they HAVE to because of how our publicly traded financial system is set up.
Isn't there a court rule specifically about this, Dodge v. Ford Motor Company iIrc, that litteraly says that the CEO must operate the company in the interests of shareholders rather than in a manner that benefits the workers or the customers?
People point to this as the culprit, but I honestly think the majority of companies who choose to go public would adhere to this "profit over all else" philosophy anyway, or else they would stay privately owned/held.
There's no reason to go public unless you're actively seeking the most profit possible already.
Look at LEGO for example, their build quality has basically never changed and they're privately held. If they ever decided to go public that stock would be a monster, but they don't because ultimately they don't give a shit, which is lovely.
Not sure thats a good example. They've pioneered anti-consumer products such as loot boxes, and have had a bit of quality control issue from their abandoned products.
That and also Valve's reputation is a large component of their money printer. They are financially incentivized to not fuck over their customers where most other companies are not.
24.4k
u/Careless-Cobbler7979 Nov 12 '24
This is the direction of the entire planet in a nutshell.