Edit: the estimates were way off!
Elon took out loans with over 100% annual rates?
Readit Newswhatok commented on Trump snubs Twitter after Musk announces reactivation of ex-president's account reuters.com/technology/mu... · Posted by u/karp773
> if you made a naïve assumption of 3-4 packages per delivery then it's a similar workload
But you're still just making an assumption with 0 evidence. I would love to see a distribution of how common multi-package deliveries are, but we don't have that information, and I highly suspect that it's overwhelmingly one package per delivery.
It seems like an exceptionally bad assumption that Amazon is regularly shipping 3-4 items individually rather than bundling them up. After all, they are basically a logistics company at this point.
If we're just making assumptions here, you may as well assume that most Amazon deliveries are to apartment buildings, where the driver just leaves everything at the front desk, there are 200 packagers per delivery, and the driver is only making 2 stops per day.
I'm not making an argument one way or the other beyond that the OP conflating deliveries with packages is inaccurate and misleading. People are acting like drivers are expected to make 400 individual deliveries a day which doesn't remotely pass any sort of sniff test.
> an average of 3-4 packages per delivery
Do you have any source for this? It seems like a really weird assumption to make, especially given that Amazon will already bundle multiple orders into the same package.
I should clarify that comment with if you made a naïve assumption of 3-4 packages per delivery then it's a similar workload. I don't doubt that Amazon workers are treated worse than UPS workers but comparing packages to deliveries without normalizing somehow is not productive.
The 400 package number from the article is also specifically cited from this company and we have no idea whether that is a nationwide figure while the UPS comment implies that it is.
Wow, I guess I never really paid attention to the details behind all the Amazon headlines I see.
"In April, Amazon announced it would reduce the amount it paid for drivers from $17.25 to $16.00 an hour, according to the letter...Weeks later, Amazon announced a series of raises for its drivers around the country as part of a public relations push following a union drive at an Amazon warehouse"
"Currently, Amazon delivery drivers are expected to deliver upwards of 400 packages a day on 10-hour routes that often extend up to 12 hours."
400 seems crazy, I wondered about UPS. According to Google "At UPS, the average driver makes about 120 deliveries per day, says Jack Levis, the shipping giant's director of process management"
Comparing packages to deliveries is apples to oranges. I don't disagree that these jobs are rough but 120 deliveries with an average of 3-4 packages per delivery paints a similar picture.
whatok commented on ARK Space Exploration and Innovation ETF launches tomorrow ark-funds.com/arkx... · Posted by u/vvincendon
Where is ARKA, the etf of ark etfs?
You have a small taste of that in this with the second largest holding PRNT.
whatok commented on Netflix to start testing warnings for people borrowing login info gammawire.com/netflix-to-... · Posted by u/sharkweek
>Netflix would not remotely resemble its current form and likely would have been acquired years ago if they did not pivot to their own content.
You can't acquire a private company unless they're willing to sell.
>Switching to their own content required and still requires huge amounts of money; est. 17bn last year[0].
I don't follow your point? Private companies can take a loan just as easily as public. If they were unable to attain the financing they wanted, they'd still have plenty of their own content, just not as much.
>Additionally, the gross profit number is a flawed number for many reasons; try looking at operating or net income or anything farther down the income statement from basic revenue. Netflix has no option but to finance content spend with debt as they do not generate enough FCF to cover content spend and will quickly fall behind competitors if they don't.
I'd suggest you do the same. Their cash balance increased from $5 billion to $8 billion last year. They took out "debt" to finance their movies because money is cheap right now. Nothing they've done required them being a public company, and nothing you've shown makes me believe they couldn't be in exactly the same position they currently are as a private company. They didn't even start borrowing money of significance until 2012, I still don't believe for a second they'd be "bankrupt" as a a private company.
https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/nflx/financials/balance-she...
> I don't follow your point? Private companies can take a loan just as easily as public. If they were unable to attain the financing they wanted, they'd still have plenty of their own content, just not as much.
Private companies face a higher cost of capital than equivalent public companies and are unable to borrow as much money as public companies are able to. This is basic finance 101 stuff. Without debt financing, they would not have been able to begin their pivot when they needed to. Netflix is able to borrow at much lower rates than a company with the same financials solely because they are a large public company. Google "equity cushion" if you're unfamiliar with the term.
> I'd suggest you do the same. Their cash balance increased from $5 billion to $8 billion last year. They took out "debt" to finance their movies because money is cheap right now. Nothing they've done required them being a public company, and nothing you've shown makes me believe they couldn't be in exactly the same position they currently are as a private company.
Yes, Netflix is doing much better financially over the past few years and especially in the past year given the pandemic. I don't see how their cash balance is relevant in the face of content spend 2-3x that much. The initial contention was over content spend and a misleading gross profit number.
>They didn't even start borrowing money of significance until 2012, I still don't believe for a second they'd be "bankrupt" as a a private company.
They started borrowing when they needed to pivot to their own content, had to do so at pretty high rates, and luckily succeeded in their pivot.
Throughout this, I don't see any acknowledgement of where streaming was back then and how competitive the space has become since then. Netflix needs to spend on content or it will get left behind. A smaller Netflix offers no competitive edge right now and a smaller Netflix years ago would have been held hostage by content owners while being unable to have any real control over sub pricing; see poorly handled rate increases years ago.
whatok commented on Netflix to start testing warnings for people borrowing login info gammawire.com/netflix-to-... · Posted by u/sharkweek
>Netflix has borrowed billions (and billions) of dollars to get where they are. As a private entity they've gone bust seven or eight years ago.
Netflix has been profitable since at least 2005... they may not have grown as quickly, but I'd need some data to back up the claim they'd be bankrupt without billions in investment.
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/NFLX/netflix/gross...
>but Netflix's terms literally always said that accounts could only be shared with people living in the same household as you.
I never said anything to the contrary. But it's no secret to netflix or anyone else that account sharing happens. This wouldn't be a news story otherwise. It also doesn't change the fact it's customer hostile and clearly an attempt to increase revenue.
Netflix would not remotely resemble its current form and likely would have been acquired years ago if they did not pivot to their own content. Switching to their own content required and still requires huge amounts of money; est. 17bn last year[0]. Additionally, the gross profit number is a flawed number for many reasons; try looking at operating or net income or anything farther down the income statement from basic revenue. Netflix has no option but to finance content spend with debt as they do not generate enough FCF to cover content spend and will quickly fall behind competitors if they don't.
[0] https://www.pcmag.com/news/netflix-will-probably-spend-19-bi...
whatok commented on America's 1% Has Taken $50T From the Bottom 90% time.com/5888024/50-trill... · Posted by u/paulpauper
If Bezos continues paying people at minimum wage, hires union busting lawyers, and hires more lawyers to actively lobby to keep minimum wage low for 20+ years while he makes more money. Is he stealing from poor people or is that just people on the Internet trying to convince themselves he is stealing from poor people?
Amazon has been paying significantly above minimum wage for several years now:
https://www.npr.org/2018/10/02/653597466/amazon-sets-15-mini...
It took about 10 words to realize this was written by someone holding a short position. This is fine, but Wallstreetbets demands some sort of regulation?
> Initial Disclosure: This report represents our opinion, and we encourage every reader to do their own due diligence. Please see our full disclaimer at the bottom of the report. We have no position (short or long) in Clover Health because we think in this moment for public markets, it is more important for people to understand the role short sellers play in exposing fraud and corporate malfeasance. For more on that discussion, see our conclusion. For members of the media who wish to independently corroborate our work, please contact us for information on sources on condition that their anonymity is maintained unless they explicitly agree to go on-record.
Relevant text: Oracle is implementing a more flexible employee work location policy and has changed its Corporate Headquarters from Redwood City, California to Austin, Texas. We believe these moves best position Oracle for growth and provide our personnel with more flexibility about where and how they work. Depending on their role, this means that many of our employees can choose their office location as well as continue to work from home part time or all of the time. In addition, we will continue to support major hubs for Oracle around the world, including those in the United States such as Redwood City, Austin, Santa Monica, Seattle, Denver, Orlando and Burlington, among others, and we expect to add other locations over time. By implementing a more modern approach to work, we expect to further improve our employees’ quality of life and quality of output.