568
Wendy’s Vows No Burger ‘Surge Pricing’ After Online Fury
(www.thedailybeast.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2024
568 points (96.3% liked)
News
23627 readers
2730 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
That would also teach them to not bother backing down if there's backlash in response to an announcement...
So you have a certain level of annual profit. You suggest something incredibly offensive that you believe will increase profits by say 10% with the idea you can roll it back if its a net negative. The response is so negative that you re-assess and believe you will actually LOSE 10%. You roll it back but people are still pissed so you end up losing 2% to decrease in goodwill.
Anyone whose take away is that they should just roll on and lose 10% would be a fucking idiot. The proper take away ought to be staff ideas like this with a disinterested third party before announcing to the world so you don't lose good will in the first place.
What? Are you insane?
It is logical, I know for a fact that's how a lot of executives think when there's a backlash, they maybe go back part way or all the way on it (usually the former) people are still (rightly) upset then eventually they get jaded to the point of not giving a fuck about the backlash and making even worse decisions.
Those executives should be fired. Or at this point they should just set prices regardless of market, even though no one will buy at that price point. Same ridiculous logic.
The logical presumption is that the backslash for proposing it is a fraction of what the backlash is for implementing it.
I guarantee you if the backlash affects profits and angers shareholders the csuite won't be jaded about it.
They will find ways to blame anyone or anything else.
They can say whatever they want, but everyone knows where the buck stops at, who's ultimately responsible for the decisions. Especially so the stockholders.
In theory sure, but in the real world it's much more messy and convoluted.
Just to state what I thought was obvious, I don't agree with or think this is how things should be done, but it makes sense if you understand the corporate ghoul mindset.
Well, I was just discussing the 'backlash' portion of your comment, and not your overall belief of the subject.
I promise you, I live in the real world as well.
Then you should be well aware that they will find ways to obscure and divert blame wherever and however possible.
And you should be aware that the people, especially the stockholders, see right through that b.s.
Are we really going to just repeat the whole conversation over again?
Lmao, you understand that shareholders are an extremely large and diverse group of different interests? Not to mention Execs generally hold large quantities of the stock themselves
I literally work in the financial industry, specifically Brokerage side.
That's without even getting into how much is owned by groups like Blackrock