Based on history huh? You pulled a number out of your ass, dude. There’s no history that would indicate anything like that happening unless there was a complete market crash. I choose not to subscribe to your 🌈🐻 beliefs, that doesn’t make me sad. Quite the opposite. Thanks 🙏

Don’t you have to go be stupid someplace else?

I’m not countering everyone I’m sharing my opinion in a reply.

Oh shit I just did it again.

Also $60 a share? Lol you mean $1,200 pre-split? Jesus Christ you are such a 🌈🐻

Your numbers are off.

I thought people hated Bezos. Either way Amazon as a business will be fine

… uh huh.

You know, I don’t usually gloat when I’m right, but didn’t I say it would surge today? I almost feel sorry for you almost, but I don’t. You’re welcome to anyone that listened.

Not even a little bit.

So you’re saying news of the CEO stepping down would cause the stock price to surge?

🤔

First four sentences are entirely anecdotal so I’ll ignore it entirely.

-12 layers thing is semi bullshit. Every company has these layers you’re describing, they’re called departments. Even at my job, we have my local team, then we have the manager of that team, then we have the department lead, then that guy has a manager who is the director, then that director has a team of other directors and all those directors are part of another team and that team reports up to either another department or the C-level, depending on how big the company is. Let’s make this clear, I’m NOT saying that companies aren’t bloated, they are. I know that, everyone knows that. The thing you’re not understanding is that if there are departments dedicated to researching and actioning the effectiveness of layoffs, then it becomes a non-issue for the business because it’s ever-changing. It’s obviously too complex of an issue to encapsulate here, or to come up with one cut and dry solution, so I guess I don’t understand why you think you know more than the people at Amazon who are actually paid to do this.

Still waiting on an answer from the other guy on where he pulled 50,000 from

>and 3rd party retailers would be more likely to ship with Amazon if the delivery business is separated from the retail business

Why do you think this? Like I said, anyone with a brain would still understand that it’s still Amazon or owned by Amazon. And that using the business benefits Amazon in one way or another. Retailers don’t ship with Amazon because they are competing with Amazon. Even if it was separated, they would still know that using Amazon to ship would detriment their business inherently by helping Amazon.

Like I said, it’s all asinine.

Something doesn’t add up there. Where’s the part where I lose all my money? When does that happen?

EDIT: nevermind, I had ChatGPT explain in more detail, and then give me a dumbed down version of both sides. I understand everything now.

E V E R Y T H I N G

Where are you pulling this number? 50,000 employees? What departments? Which employees? Do you even understand the logistics that must go into layoffs to ensure it’s a good move for the business? Do you even understand the amount of money that is spent researching that data before they even come to a decision?

50,000 people out of a job for what? I agree that “trimming the fat” occasionally is completely necessary, if not, mandatory for a business to succeed, but you can’t just look at it like it’s a singular data point. “Well on average the employees there make $100,000/yr so if we cut 50,000 jobs we’ll be up $5,000,000,000 a year in revenue!” Has too many fallacies and oversimplifications to comment on.

There are a lot of other, more effective measures a business can take on such a massive operational scale to cut costs.

I’m just wondering what his deal really is. Is $15k such a small amount of money to this person that they wouldn’t even bother reading the rest of the post (which had nothing to do with my position anyways, I was just doing that to cooperate with the rules of the Sub)

Or maybe they’re just so bad with their ADHD that two paragraphs is simply impossible to sit through.

All in all, it’s really sad because I know for a fact that they did read the entire post, they’re just trying to seem snide and witty, at my expense. It’s sad we can’t just have a discussion.

My goal is to get rich or die tryin’

See, but as I kind of said in another comment… If you wait for the “dust to settle”, you’re already too late. A lot of people think like that and it’s a very common fallacy. Buy it while it’s still meeting a lot of resistance.

Yes. Like I mentioned, I had a small buy in at first but when it dipped I took that opportunity to buy more, considerably more (relatively)

It’s a bit embarrassing to admit, but some shares were also lost along the way to MC. Yes I am aware of the risks of trading on margin.

Yeah; your premise seems valid but I just don’t buy it for some reason. Anyone with a brain would understand it’s still a conglomerate.

Source?

You do realize that sometimes employee wages being paid is a good thing right? The way you approach this makes it sound like you could believe that Amazon would be most efficient with 0 employees. Which could be true later, but that’s not for at least another 10-30 years.

…why?

As is tradition

I don’t understand the benefits to a shareholder of a company splitting into segments? Also what does this really change? Amazon (and Alibaba) already have a million subsidiaries. This just seems like a dumb way to avert Monopoly regulation to me, but I’ll admit I don’t know all the facts there, obviously.

5 years LMAO try 5 months dude

Source?

Also no offense or anything but I’m not going to take any financial advise from someone who can’t distinguish (then/than). Have a good day though

ER? Emergency room? Erectile Rehabilitation? Enormous Rats?