• cerement
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    6 months ago

    more a matter of “don’t wanna” than “can’t”

    • glimse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      It says they operated at a loss in SK. If that’s true, I wouldn’t wanna, either.

      • schmidtster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        43
        ·
        6 months ago

        Dang, stores better get rid of their loss leaders than.

        Sometimes you gotta take a small loss for the overall benefit of the company/system.

        • SuperDuper@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          How is remaining in an unprofitable market a “loss leader”?

          Sometimes you gotta take a small loss for the overall benefit of the company/system.

          You really don’t think Twitch did some analysis on this matter before making a decision? Or do you just figure that your uninformed assumptions about their financials are more accurate than their internal analysis? Clearly whatever benefit they were or were not getting from their SK business was not enough to justify the operating costs.

            • roguetrick@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              18
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              They’re leaving the market. If anything Amazon is putting a shot across the bow of the ISPs who are charging these interconnect fees to get THEM negative press and make the Korean public demand a change in the laws so they can get the Internet they pay for.

              Amazon may be quitting twitch in Korea, but their cloud services are still paying for the dumb fees.

            • SuperDuper@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              What negative press? They’re no longer going to do business in a particular market for completely normal reasons. This isn’t some kind of scandal, it’s a standard decision for a company to make regarding unprofitable operations. Everyone besides you seems to understand this.

              You clearly have no idea what you’re talking about.

          • SuperDuper@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Neither does the person you’re replying to. They probably just learned the term “loss leader” and thought they’d sound smart bringing it up but have no idea how the concept actually works in practice.

        • DeepFriedDresden@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Loss leaders work because customers will purchase other products/services. Operating in a market at a loss isn’t what a loss leader is.

        • iegod@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Gaming nerds dictating how business should operate is one of the funniest things to observe.

            • cerement
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              6 months ago
              • “corporation” + “bribery” “lobbying” … nope, never seen that before …
              • “corporation” + “breaking the law” … nor that one either …
              • MolochAlter@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                Correct, but those are both expensive in their own ways.

                If they don’t see a return they won’t do either.

          • schmidtster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            6 months ago

            Which would cost you more in the end, so if removing it costs more, you keep it in.

            That’s what’s a loss leader is……

    • CluckN@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      6 months ago

      I also didn’t know that South Korea charges extra for foreign content providers which is also pretty aggressive.

      • sigmaklimgrindset@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yeah, and it all started from a lawsuit between SK Telecom and Netflix because in 2020 people watching Squid Games in Korea used an unprecedented amount of bandwidth. Reuters article

        Most telecom providers make deals with the big platforms regarding payment, but I guess S. Korea really wants Afreeca to be the only player in the streaming space. It could also be chaebol shenanigans.

    • DarkThoughts@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      There’s no “don’t wanna” unless there’s a “can’t” due to not being able to make a profit. If they could they would. It’s simple as that.

      • PrettyLights@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        Companies don’t just want to make a profit, they want to make the largest profit. Plenty of businesses turn down profitable ventures in pursuit of more lucrative returns.

        • DarkThoughts@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Why would they do that if they aren’t mutually exclusive to one another? I’d get this notion if they’d started to do some sort of alternate way of providing for the SK market where their original platform would have been in the way but why close off profitable branches for no reason at all?

          • PrettyLights@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Because an organization or person only has so much bandwidth and attention. You can’t infinitely scale to grab every bit of profit.

            “Tripping over dollars to pick up pennies.”

        • Chailles@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          While true, that’s not exactly relevant when it’s a choice between losing a lot of money and not losing a lot of money.