| > The CEO of Amazon just can't be associated with such public failures. I see no reason for this. I think the opposite is true, having high profile test would actually improve the image of the public figure. Maybe if it was Amazon himself you would have a point, but a totally separate company? Sorry, not buying it. It seems to me you are just making up excuses to explain away Bezos failure. > These are not software margins we are talking about, to channel my inner Ricky Bobby: If you ain't software, you are last. So first of all Branson is a terrible source. Second of all, of course they don't get software margin. They are capital intensive business. But that is just terrible analysis, based on this logic no company before 1960 could ever be a good business because its not software? So I guess anybody not selling software should just go home and start drinking because apparently its not worth it. If the market is large and you compare favorably in terms of competition they are good business by literally any objective measure. That is other then haters who clearly have personal dislike for the CEO. |