Comments on: The Philosophy of Profit http://www.randygage.com/blog/the-philosophy-of-profit/ Success Tips, Marketing Strategies, Prosperity Insights and More... Sun, 12 Feb 2012 22:46:34 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Erica http://www.randygage.com/blog/the-philosophy-of-profit/#comment-11791 Erica Tue, 13 Jul 2010 02:05:58 +0000 http://www.randygage.com/blog/?p=1929#comment-11791 I do, indeed. But the value of my work and the dollars I receive for doing it is a matter of semantics... what I "choose" to charge for is, in fact, my value. And that isn't arbitrary at all. I do, indeed. But the value of my work and the dollars I receive for doing it is a matter of semantics… what I “choose” to charge for is, in fact, my value. And that isn’t arbitrary at all.

]]> By: Bones Rodriguez http://www.randygage.com/blog/the-philosophy-of-profit/#comment-11787 Bones Rodriguez Mon, 12 Jul 2010 19:52:59 +0000 http://www.randygage.com/blog/?p=1929#comment-11787 True Russ- I TOTALLY agree with you that I am totally disregarding the long-term sustainability of a company. I actually think the idea of a "long-term" company is an old one- as in, they don't really make companies like that anymore. "fast money, cash out" seems to be the idea. And then you move that money into something else. Kiyosaki talks about the velocity of money. I only say that because the strategy now seems to be to build a company, and sell it or cash it in for a different one. Of course, you sell it to a bigger, longer-lasting company (which is against my own point), or the time for what that company does is just over. I love that quote "What's wrong with Capitalism is the capitalist", but that's pretty much what could be said about anything, right? With the way the world changes so quickly, and with ideas and products coming and going, it just seems that the idea of a "long-haul" company feels like an industrial age concept. True Russ- I TOTALLY agree with you that I am totally disregarding the long-term sustainability of a company. I actually think the idea of a “long-term” company is an old one- as in, they don’t really make companies like that anymore.

“fast money, cash out” seems to be the idea. And then you move that money into something else. Kiyosaki talks about the velocity of money.

I only say that because the strategy now seems to be to build a company, and sell it or cash it in for a different one. Of course, you sell it to a bigger, longer-lasting company (which is against my own point), or the time for what that company does is just over.

I love that quote “What’s wrong with Capitalism is the capitalist”, but that’s pretty much what could be said about anything, right?

With the way the world changes so quickly, and with ideas and products coming and going, it just seems that the idea of a “long-haul” company feels like an industrial age concept.

]]> By: Edward Devero http://www.randygage.com/blog/the-philosophy-of-profit/#comment-11786 Edward Devero Mon, 12 Jul 2010 19:23:25 +0000 http://www.randygage.com/blog/?p=1929#comment-11786 Yes, that is true. Not many car companies can be accused of over-engineering their products. But there are a few beacons of light in this sea of capitalistic darkness, namely, the firm that built the speed controller for one of my mixing machines, and a mountain bike suspension fork manufacturer based in bologna, Italy. My mechanic said one of the Japanese brands actually makes an effort to make their cars more robust and longer lasting on a continual basis. The big three are guilty of not doing as good a job as they should and that's why they keep losing market share. Actually, one out of he big three has pretty good quality standards. Yes, that is true. Not many car companies can be accused of over-engineering their products. But there are a few beacons of light in this sea of capitalistic darkness, namely, the firm that built the speed controller for one of my mixing machines, and a mountain bike suspension fork manufacturer based in bologna, Italy. My mechanic said one of the Japanese brands actually makes an effort to make their cars more robust and longer lasting on a continual basis. The big three are guilty of not doing as good a job as they should and that’s why they keep losing market share. Actually, one out of he big three has pretty good quality standards.

]]> By: Russ Pratt http://www.randygage.com/blog/the-philosophy-of-profit/#comment-11783 Russ Pratt Mon, 12 Jul 2010 12:12:05 +0000 http://www.randygage.com/blog/?p=1929#comment-11783 Strong points and interesting ideas however in among all the debate over profit vs. corporate responsibility I don't see any discussion regarding sustainability and how that impacts the truthfulness of the post. The point of the blog is the moral imperative for a company to make not only a profit, while being a responsible citizen, but to make the maximum profit. The arguments both for and against ignore that for a company or individual to maximize they must sustain. The company that attempts to maximize today while ignoring next week is not making the maximum potential profit how can they under these circumstances. Doubt it look back at two of the statements by Bones “The best way for a company to make a profit is to make something that is good enough for you to buy a new one as soon as possible." This is the same mentality that helped place Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac into receivership, and GM under government control. Did these actions and corporate decisions make the most possible profit? Perhaps, for the time frame measured, however what about last week, next year, or 10 years from now? Bones second comment “Sometimes I go to parties, and tell jokes, and get games going. Sometimes I get paid to do that, sometimes I don’t. Either way, the “work” is there, but the money may or may not be…. got me?” Here as is so often seen in corporate and government is the finite view again. Just because the money is not seeable in the moment is not that it is not there, how often does the action today produce the profit tomorrow? The maximum profit can only be achieved over time, and that can only happen with a premium on sustainability. Randy – Love you Boss but the post makes the false assumption that its possible to have one-Maximum profit, w/o the other- Corporate responsibility. Bones well written ideas however your placing a false test into the equation that maximum profit can only be what you are seeing now. Finally not a new thought but one that bears repeating, the flaw in capitalism is the capitalist. Strong points and interesting ideas however in among all the debate over profit vs. corporate responsibility I don’t see any discussion regarding sustainability and how that impacts the truthfulness of the post. The point of the blog is the moral imperative for a company to make not only a profit, while being a responsible citizen, but to make the maximum profit. The arguments both for and against ignore that for a company or individual to maximize they must sustain. The company that attempts to maximize today while ignoring next week is not making the maximum potential profit how can they under these circumstances. Doubt it look back at two of the statements by Bones “The best way for a company to make a profit is to make something that is good enough for you to buy a new one as soon as possible.” This is the same mentality that helped place Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac into receivership, and GM under government control. Did these actions and corporate decisions make the most possible profit? Perhaps, for the time frame measured, however what about last week, next year, or 10 years from now? Bones second comment “Sometimes I go to parties, and tell jokes, and get games going. Sometimes I get paid to do that, sometimes I don’t. Either way, the “work” is there, but the money may or may not be…. got me?” Here as is so often seen in corporate and government is the finite view again. Just because the money is not seeable in the moment is not that it is not there, how often does the action today produce the profit tomorrow? The maximum profit can only be achieved over time, and that can only happen with a premium on sustainability. Randy – Love you Boss but the post makes the false assumption that its possible to have one-Maximum profit, w/o the other- Corporate responsibility. Bones well written ideas however your placing a false test into the equation that maximum profit can only be what you are seeing now. Finally not a new thought but one that bears repeating, the flaw in capitalism is the capitalist.

]]> By: Rgsgoodh Eartikno. W., Abkürzung http://www.randygage.com/blog/the-philosophy-of-profit/#comment-11769 Rgsgoodh Eartikno. W., Abkürzung Sun, 11 Jul 2010 20:02:47 +0000 http://www.randygage.com/blog/?p=1929#comment-11769 I wholeheartedly agree with Randy. It totally makes sense to me. Period. "Now of course they must conduct their business affairs with INTEGRITY, invest for the future, do so without PLUNDERING the environment, or TRAMPLING ON THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS. But if they operate by a congruent moral philosophy, they will be in accord with these principles. ......If you don’t understand the MORAL for a company to make money, you’re sending CONFLICTING MESSAGES to yourself, and will have a hard time being successful at ANYTHING. " Vo L. I wholeheartedly agree with Randy. It totally makes sense to me. Period.

“Now of course they must conduct their business affairs with INTEGRITY, invest for the future, do so without PLUNDERING the environment, or TRAMPLING ON THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS. But if they operate by a congruent moral philosophy, they will be in accord with these principles. ……If you don’t understand the MORAL for a company to make money, you’re sending CONFLICTING MESSAGES to yourself, and will have a hard time being successful at ANYTHING. ”
Vo L.

]]> By: Bones Rodriguez http://www.randygage.com/blog/the-philosophy-of-profit/#comment-11754 Bones Rodriguez Sat, 10 Jul 2010 19:22:25 +0000 http://www.randygage.com/blog/?p=1929#comment-11754 You are 100% right about this; I don't think anyone here would say differently. I was saying that the game of all that risk and such for the sake of the wallet is what puts people and our civilization SECOND, which is obvious now. It doesn't really matter if someone is mentally stimulated, or even if the company provides something that helps people; just that the money keeps moving. You are 100% right about this; I don’t think anyone here would say differently.

I was saying that the game of all that risk and such for the sake of the wallet is what puts people and our civilization SECOND, which is obvious now.

It doesn’t really matter if someone is mentally stimulated, or even if the company provides something that helps people; just that the money keeps moving.

]]> By: Bones Rodriguez http://www.randygage.com/blog/the-philosophy-of-profit/#comment-11753 Bones Rodriguez Sat, 10 Jul 2010 19:18:45 +0000 http://www.randygage.com/blog/?p=1929#comment-11753 Hey Jim- Thanks for writing to me privately! In the story of Centex (and this will sound harsh), but the only reason you had a job to begin with is that you brought money in. That's what salespeople are for. you were a tool for money-getting. When they could get the money without you, they fired you. That's how it works when the bottom line is the only value. Hey Jim- Thanks for writing to me privately!

In the story of Centex (and this will sound harsh), but the only reason you had a job to begin with is that you brought money in.

That’s what salespeople are for.
you were a tool for money-getting. When they could get the money without you, they fired you.

That’s how it works when the bottom line is the only value.

]]> By: Bones Rodriguez http://www.randygage.com/blog/the-philosophy-of-profit/#comment-11752 Bones Rodriguez Sat, 10 Jul 2010 19:15:29 +0000 http://www.randygage.com/blog/?p=1929#comment-11752 I agree- and you'll notice we don't have a "score-keeping" system for any of those things but money. I can't scare you into giving me your health! I agree- and you’ll notice we don’t have a “score-keeping” system for any of those things but money.

I can’t scare you into giving me your health!

]]> By: Bones Rodriguez http://www.randygage.com/blog/the-philosophy-of-profit/#comment-11751 Bones Rodriguez Sat, 10 Jul 2010 19:13:59 +0000 http://www.randygage.com/blog/?p=1929#comment-11751 Although the "best way is to provide as much value as you can to as many people" is a great IDEAL, it is not what works in reality to create the biggest profit. Just look around at our biggest and best companies- check with REALITY. Our oil companies prevent battery technology for electric cars, so they can profit more. Our computer companies buy and destroy technology so they can profit more. Commercials are ALL scare tactics. I'm not saying it DOESN'T work, I'm saying it isn't what makes the MOST PROFITABLE. You can provide a 10 million people with a free e-book that changes their lives and they love it and you for it forever, and be LESS profitable than selling one barely-passable ebook to someone who stops reading it half-way through for a dollar. The first provides more value, but the second is more PROFITABLE. Although the “best way is to provide as much value as you can to as many people” is a great IDEAL, it is not what works in reality to create the biggest profit.

Just look around at our biggest and best companies- check with REALITY.

Our oil companies prevent battery technology for electric cars, so they can profit more.

Our computer companies buy and destroy technology so they can profit more.

Commercials are ALL scare tactics.

I’m not saying it DOESN’T work, I’m saying it isn’t what makes the MOST PROFITABLE.

You can provide a 10 million people with a free e-book that changes their lives and they love it and you for it forever,
and be LESS profitable than selling one barely-passable ebook to someone who stops reading it half-way through for a dollar.

The first provides more value, but the second is more PROFITABLE.

]]> By: Bones Rodriguez http://www.randygage.com/blog/the-philosophy-of-profit/#comment-11750 Bones Rodriguez Sat, 10 Jul 2010 19:08:22 +0000 http://www.randygage.com/blog/?p=1929#comment-11750 I think if you increase the bottom line by bettering the second part, that's GREAT! What I asked (as a question) is "But what happens when..." that means it's a CONDITIONAL phrase. As in "what happens when" that particular situation comes up? I agree that the green companies are growing n popularity, and it's because our some of our VALUES as a society are changing- that's the part I think will change capitalism and bring something else. I think if you increase the bottom line by bettering the second part, that’s GREAT!

What I asked (as a question) is “But what happens when…” that means it’s a CONDITIONAL phrase. As in “what happens when” that particular situation comes up?

I agree that the green companies are growing n popularity, and it’s because our some of our VALUES as a society are changing- that’s the part I think will change capitalism and bring something else.

]]>