Yeah, because employees totally stopped using email because employers can and do archive it and read it when/if they want to.

So, your argument is that someone:

1. Created a page at Amazon listing a $400 game console at $80, which would net them maybe $70, after fees.
2. Went into Walmart, and used that page to get the console for $80, plus tax.
3. Planned to sell that same console to whoever bought it through the Amazon link, losing $20 or so on each console.

Yes, that's theoretically possible.

It's also theoretically possible that they were purchasing test units for the Archons of Centauri 7, who will then gift us with their technology for unlimited clean energy, but have a religious objection to paying more than $80 for a PS4.

Retailers have the right to correct pricing errors, if they were clearly errors (i.e. Xbox for $40 rather than $400). This was no pricing error - there's no way the Amazon seller/Walmart buyer can argue that he made a pricing error on his webpage, but at the same time demand that Walmart match the pricing error.

I made up my mind based on the facts that have been presented. I am open to having my opinion changed once presented with further compelling facts. Unfortunately, absent a trial, that's not likely to happen.

As I said, it may or may not have been justified to shoot at him in the car during the scuffle. But once Brown started running away, having not gotten hold of Wilson's gun, did Wilson still feel Brown was an imminent threat? Did he somehow think that Brown could shoot bullets from his back while fleeing? Or did he perhaps think that getting down on his knees and raising his hands was some sort of attack stance?

Wilson didn't kill Brown in the car during the scuffle. He killed him 150 feet away after chasing him.

In 1995 I was in Dusseldorf, Germany, taking part in a large peaceful protest that occurs annually there. It's a march through the centre of the city, all mapped out in advance. Police in full riot gear were on hand, as they are every year. Thousands of them, brought in from all over the country. The previous year, some shitheads had started rioting, and some shops were looted. As we marched through the streets, I remember noticing bystanders gathered along the planned route, just watching the march. Nothing unusual there. Except that there just happened to be particularly large clusters of bystanders, mainly young man, watching the march from right in front of each liquor store and electronics store that we passed. I found that to be an interesting coincidence.

Unfortunately for the "bystanders", that year's march remained peaceful, so they didn't get the opportunity to cash in.

That's right. All of them. Every last one. Not just a handful of opportunistic shitheads. Every person who has ever feigned outrage at this incident was merely plotting to steal themselves a new TV.

Which shooting was justified? The one that occurred at close range during a scuffle? Maybe yes, maybe no. But the fatal one that occurred 150 feet away from the original scuffle, after Brown had surrendered? Not a fucking chance.

Running from a police officer is not an offense worthy of public execution without trial.

Very good point. Was trying to keep it simple. If I recall, the expected relocation costs are in the range of $6B for this spectrum.

Just because you can't believe it, doesn't mean it's not true. 65MHz, covering 315 million people. Spectrum's usually priced per MHz-POP (i.e. 10MHz of spectrum covering 1 million people is 10 million MHz-POPs).

There's a huge amount of variation in pricing, though. The most expensive license right now (on a MHz-POP basis) is for 10MHz covering the Chicago area (8.3M people) - $5.50 per MHz-POP. The most expensive license on an absolute basis is for 20MHz covering the NY Metro Area (27M people): $2 billion.

On the other hand, there are some licenses in rural Louisiana and South Dakota going for under $2k, or less than $0.01 per MHz-POP.

True, but in this case, the top bids, combined, are $34B. In other words, if the auction ended today, the government would receive $34 billion.

Hey, a deal's a deal. We didn't get Sun 2, the aliens don't get Europa as their private playground.

Walmart's cost of goods sold (i.e. the % of revenue that gets spent on the products they sell, doesn't include cost of labor, rent, light, etc.) is 75%, slightly above Amazon's 73%. So, WalMart is, on average, charging a SMALLER markup than Amazon.

Quite a number of states (Cali and Wisconsin come to mind) have laws prohibiting loss leaders, usually only if they're viewed as predatory pricing (i.e. trying to drive competitors out of business).

Wisconsin has a law that sets a minimum margin for gasoline. Idea is to prevent large operators with other revenue streams (i.e. a supermarket with a couple of gas pumps) from selling below cost to bring in shoppers, thereby driving out small operators

"they talk about people with amazon seller accounts creating sales in order to have them matched"

No, they're not creating "sales." They're creating sales pages they have no intention of actually delivering. Unless you think that the people pulling this scam would have happily shipped out hundreds of PS4s at $80 each, when the orders came in.

Oops, forgot link: http://www.dol.gov/minwage/cha...