Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> What? If Apple or FedEx could get customers to (sustainably) pay them without actually providing a product in return, do you think they would have kept making phones and delivering packages just for the hell of it?

That's a strange counterfactual. Why would customers keep paying a company that doesn't provide any goods or services to anyone? They're not really "customers" anymore if all that is happening is money transfer to the company.



I think they were confused why you included the word "usually".


I was considering that there could potentially be exceptions, perhaps some non-public facing investment or trading firms without traditional "customers".

So "usually".


It's not really strange at all. It's a clear illustration of why your perspective is incomplete.


How are they "customers" if the company is no longer providing any goods or services to anyone and is just taking their money?

> incomplete

see "usually"




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: