[redserk]

Fiduciary duty is fun to define because I’d bet it could be argued both ways here. If you want to consider Costco’s low margins as a core factor as to why consumers choose them, opting for a decision that makes their customer base run off wouldn’t be very responsible to shareholders.

Consider the Target backlash last year. They’re since down 14% vs Walmart (up 30-ish%). Regardless of anyone’s political beliefs, I don’t think a 14% loss seemingly caused by behavior that a segment of customers considered hostile is thinking of the shareholders.

[petcat]

Right but they're not being sued by their shareholders, they're being sued by a handful of customers and "on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated".

[JumpCrisscross]

> they're being sued by a handful of customers

To be fair, they’re being sued by customers who were marketed memberships.

[zugi]

To be really fair, they're being sued by lawyers hoping to take 50% of the proceeds, or 50% of some settlement that they get by shaking down Costco via threats to its reputation.

[JumpCrisscross]

> To be really fair, they're being sued by lawyers

Is that the case history? Or bullshit assumption? Because this looks plaintiff sponsored.

[zugi]

Adding "bullshit" to a sentence does nothing to hide this kind of ambulence-chasing vulturism and exploitation - in fact it rather highlights it.

I mean, one of the legal firms behind this is Milberg PLLC, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milberg, who has been charged with illegally paying plaintiffs to sue in order to enrich themselves.