Jiraiyathesannin
Jōnin Strategist 🧠
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2014
- Messages
- 1,644
- Reaction score
- 137
I'm no economist. But I'm a consumer with a fairly higher than average intellect and have noticed several stupid business decisions in the world of finance.
So this may be a series, might not, but regardless this is my first entry of
JIRAIYATHESANNIN'S Business tips of the week!
1) Several times while killing time (waiting for buses, avoiding women, normal stuff etc) I chill in McDonalds. Makes sense; free wifi, heat, tv. It can be nice. Especially because its open 24 hours. Multiple times, If i'm just chilling there, not eating any food or dranking any drank. They kick my white ass out. And I saw to them, wassup wit dat yo?
Eh hmm. Anyway, the argument is that if you're not buying food, you can't enjoy their property. Or if you finish your food, you have to leave in 15 minutes. I suppose one could say that you're using their internet, sucking up their heat (or a/c if you're a bastard from the south and don't have to endure this cold) or breathing their air or something.
That MIGHT be a valid point. However its actually really stupid when you give it 5 seconds to sink in. If i stay in a Mcdonalds restaurant (or Burger King, Arby's, Cheesecake Factory etc) for long enough, I WILL get thirsty. I WILL get hungry, and I most likely WILL buy something eventually. Say some student from the nearby college is studying in there at late hours. You COULD say "get da fak out, you free loader". Or... you could wait a little bit until they inevitably buy coffee. Statistically speaking, the people most likely to buy something at mcdonalds... are the people already there. People WILL get hungry or thirsty (or just have low impulse control) and they sure as hell ain't going somewhere else if they're already there. I mean COME ON.
You're losing business because you're worried about people free loading. Super markets put milk at the BACK of the store because they know, the longer they spend in your store, the more likely you are to buy bread, chicken, pet food, condoms etc.
Movie theaters often sell tickets cheap as shiT because they know you're gonna buy 30 dollars for a small pop corn.
Its economics 101.
2) This one is less intuitive, and MAY work perfectly, or... it could backfire horribly because I'm sure someone has THOUGHT this and ultimately decided against it. Currently, there are 3 mainstream cell phone operating systems. Windows phone (lol), Android (my phone of choice) and IOS (which if you're one of them, you no longer have permission to be on my thread. Leave. Go on. We'll wait..... They gone? K). The 2 big ones are android and iphone, representing google and apple respectively.
Somewhere along the line, it became a pretty even split. Iphones are the SINGLE most sold individual phone, meanwhile the total number of android sales grossly exceeds the total iphones. Makes sense.
Here's where I think google is making some mistakes. They could MORE than win back many of those customers if they do the following: Remove ALL google services from iphone users. Let that sink in.
That would mean that iphone users couldn't use gmail (the number 1 email service) youtube (perhaps one of the most heavily trafficked websites of all time) or hell, even GOOGLE (siri often uses google services).
Hell, when apple maps failed HORRIBLY in what has become the go-to example of a company failure, they said "for now, just use google maps". Well.. what if they couldn't?
Apple devices (to my knowledge) STILL don't have flash on them. Meaning that if you took away all google apps, it'd be VERY hard to use those services (take chrome away while you're at it).
When you get right down to it, 75% of the best apps on iphones are google powered. Imagine if you made google WEBSITES (like google.com) inaccessible on mobile safari (which you can easily do).
All of those iphone users would have useless devices. This is probably where you all say "well JIRAIYATHESANNIN, wouldn't google lose revenue from all of those devices?"
And my condescending answer to you is, initially, yes. Not that google's services cost anything, but they WOULD lose money at first.
But google would be fine. And EVENTUALLY, iphone sales would plummet DRAMATICALLY.
For crying out loud, google is HELPING their enemy by giving them so many services. Its like how you can use word on a mac. Why? I mean... in THAT case, word is easy to mimic and costs hundreds of dollars, but the principle is the same.
After a few months, iphones would become essentially useless. And android sales would rise 3 fold.
Thoughts? Should i continue this series? or nah son?
So this may be a series, might not, but regardless this is my first entry of
JIRAIYATHESANNIN'S Business tips of the week!
1) Several times while killing time (waiting for buses, avoiding women, normal stuff etc) I chill in McDonalds. Makes sense; free wifi, heat, tv. It can be nice. Especially because its open 24 hours. Multiple times, If i'm just chilling there, not eating any food or dranking any drank. They kick my white ass out. And I saw to them, wassup wit dat yo?
Eh hmm. Anyway, the argument is that if you're not buying food, you can't enjoy their property. Or if you finish your food, you have to leave in 15 minutes. I suppose one could say that you're using their internet, sucking up their heat (or a/c if you're a bastard from the south and don't have to endure this cold) or breathing their air or something.
That MIGHT be a valid point. However its actually really stupid when you give it 5 seconds to sink in. If i stay in a Mcdonalds restaurant (or Burger King, Arby's, Cheesecake Factory etc) for long enough, I WILL get thirsty. I WILL get hungry, and I most likely WILL buy something eventually. Say some student from the nearby college is studying in there at late hours. You COULD say "get da fak out, you free loader". Or... you could wait a little bit until they inevitably buy coffee. Statistically speaking, the people most likely to buy something at mcdonalds... are the people already there. People WILL get hungry or thirsty (or just have low impulse control) and they sure as hell ain't going somewhere else if they're already there. I mean COME ON.
You're losing business because you're worried about people free loading. Super markets put milk at the BACK of the store because they know, the longer they spend in your store, the more likely you are to buy bread, chicken, pet food, condoms etc.
Movie theaters often sell tickets cheap as shiT because they know you're gonna buy 30 dollars for a small pop corn.
Its economics 101.
2) This one is less intuitive, and MAY work perfectly, or... it could backfire horribly because I'm sure someone has THOUGHT this and ultimately decided against it. Currently, there are 3 mainstream cell phone operating systems. Windows phone (lol), Android (my phone of choice) and IOS (which if you're one of them, you no longer have permission to be on my thread. Leave. Go on. We'll wait..... They gone? K). The 2 big ones are android and iphone, representing google and apple respectively.
Somewhere along the line, it became a pretty even split. Iphones are the SINGLE most sold individual phone, meanwhile the total number of android sales grossly exceeds the total iphones. Makes sense.
Here's where I think google is making some mistakes. They could MORE than win back many of those customers if they do the following: Remove ALL google services from iphone users. Let that sink in.
That would mean that iphone users couldn't use gmail (the number 1 email service) youtube (perhaps one of the most heavily trafficked websites of all time) or hell, even GOOGLE (siri often uses google services).
Hell, when apple maps failed HORRIBLY in what has become the go-to example of a company failure, they said "for now, just use google maps". Well.. what if they couldn't?
Apple devices (to my knowledge) STILL don't have flash on them. Meaning that if you took away all google apps, it'd be VERY hard to use those services (take chrome away while you're at it).
When you get right down to it, 75% of the best apps on iphones are google powered. Imagine if you made google WEBSITES (like google.com) inaccessible on mobile safari (which you can easily do).
All of those iphone users would have useless devices. This is probably where you all say "well JIRAIYATHESANNIN, wouldn't google lose revenue from all of those devices?"
And my condescending answer to you is, initially, yes. Not that google's services cost anything, but they WOULD lose money at first.
But google would be fine. And EVENTUALLY, iphone sales would plummet DRAMATICALLY.
For crying out loud, google is HELPING their enemy by giving them so many services. Its like how you can use word on a mac. Why? I mean... in THAT case, word is easy to mimic and costs hundreds of dollars, but the principle is the same.
After a few months, iphones would become essentially useless. And android sales would rise 3 fold.
Thoughts? Should i continue this series? or nah son?
