| > No sane western corporation will willingly eliminate an entity about the site of USA that's ridiculous, small companies grow by targeting audiences and computing expected future cash flow the cost of legal action is a risk that affects the bottom line (it also affects reputation, but for new laws, the issue of reputation isn't as relevant because the laws haven't been tested by the society yet, they are fresh laws) the idea that a corporation is "insane" for estimating the future cash flows and legal expenses for providing services to an audience is comedy no, that's how a good, well-run, intelligent organization grows the GDPR represents a risk to the bottom line when services are provided to European customers, and that risk must be factored in; this risk directly affects the corporate financial structure, and investors may have some input in terms of when and how to extend service to the EU pretending that spite or some petty or small emotional frame of mind is required to apply basic sound financial principles of running a business is bizarre when running a business, you are expected to win, and winning means not going bankrupt because some psycho lawyer in the EU wants to make money by destroying your reputation, destroying your life, and destroying your business GDPR gives fuel to psycho lawyers. If you don't want to get sued by psycho lawyers, don't provide services to people who hire psycho lawyers, don't provide service to the EU. If you have deep pockets and you know the expected cost of fighting off psycho lawyers is less than the expected revenue of providing service to the EU, then it may be time to expand to the EU; you and your investors should both have an understanding of the risks and rewards of expanding service. Let me repeat: this is not an emotional matter, it is a matter of doing business. |