... take it.
... take it.
His point is that it's not the hiring company that thought he wasn't suitable, the recruitment agency thought that.
The company might have been an awesome place to work for but he couldn't get through the wall of ignorance that the recruitment agency put up.
I suppose I should have written "see". Although I do hear what I read in my head. Does that count?
(2 points to whoever gets the reference)
I want to hear more posts like this!
I got my current call off a cold call.
Well to be fair I did have a resume with the agency for years. Most agencies will call you every few years to see if you're thinking of changing jobs. I used to find it annoying but I figured that I do get a benefit from it.
You presume that case where the lady sued McDonalds because the coffee was hot was a frivolous case.
You have to be able to try to sue anyone for anything. It's up to the system to decide which cases are frivolous and which cases are not. Otherwise you may never be able to hold accountable those that should be because on the surface what they did doesn't seem like a big deal.
I think they monitor any e-mail the employee sends; not just personal e-mails. I.e. e-mails that go from Bob the programmer to Jenny the accounts-receivable lady explaining how to use the new version of the "Just Pay Me" software would be analysed to see if Bob is getting sick of working at AAA Dodads.
A lot of people treat it that way and that's where value investors make their money.
Take a listen to Roger Montgomery's latest ASX podcast/talk
His philosophy gels well with nerds like us. He likes to treat his investing as if he were buying a whole business instead of little numbers on a screen.
I sort of share your view but keep in mind that most investors will want a company to keep all of its profits and NOT pay dividends while the company is still able to make a larger return on that retained profit.
Apple has so much retained profit that it can't use it fast enough to stimulate growth. So the best thing to do is to pay some of that profit off as a dividend.
To put it another way: retaining profit and not paying dividends is the thing a company should do while it can still grow. If a company can make 30% return on equity (number out of thin air) then you want them to keep the equity they create so they can make another 30% next year. When that return on equity drops to below what you can get investing in another company or a bank account then give the investors the profits and let them put in other shares or just in a bank account.
Think of investing as a higher interest earning bank account that requires you to do a shit-tonne of analysis to make sure your money is always invested in the right place.
But wouldn't the developer discount their app if they don't get the sales numbers they were after? If I were selling an app at $5 and no one bought it I'd try to price it down to $2.50 or something and see how it went. Isn't that the process you're talking about?
Isn't that the same as your $10M house example? If my house were on the market for $10M and no one bought it, then it'd be on the market for a year (or month, whatever) before I finally cracked and reduced the price to something that would sell.
Sure the app store doesn't have that direct price negotiation but neither does a website with an app for purchase. I can't just negotiate a cheaper price with Adobe for Photoshop! But Adobe can reduce the price of the software if they feel the lower price will yield more sales.
The 30% that Apple takes is a bargain! Let them handle distribution, credit card payment and to some degree marketing & exposure.
You're not helping the developer by not buying their app just because you don't want Apple taking the developer's money. The fact is that the developer can focus on coding rather than all the messy human stuff thanks to Apple.
Same here! Guys make the same sound too. I love Marco Arment but sometimes listening to his pod cast is tiring because he's constantly speaking with a creaky voice.
Named, not names
lol I suck
You're, not your're
Canon, not Cannon (the company isn't names after a way to shoot things)
Take a chill pill Phil!
A successful [software] tool is one that was used to do something undreamed of by its author. -- S. C. Johnson