• Tavarin
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not when the profit is billions, Loblaws could run at at a sizeable loss for the next decade and still be fine.

    • Aux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      No, it can’t. 4% loss will wipe out everything they’ve earned. That’s the problem with low margins.

      • Tavarin
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes it can, they’ve been making billions in profits every year for years. Unless they are morons and frittered away the profits, they absolutely can run at a moderate loss for years.

        Why are you defending billionaires?

        • Aux@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Because you don’t understand economics and act like a 13yo kid.

          • Tavarin
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Because you think the board should take the profits and be billionaires.

            I clearly understand economics better than you, because Loblaws could easily survive years running at a loss given the BILLIONs in profits they currently make annually, and the billions their owners are worth.

            • Aux@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              You certainly don’t understand economics… Why do you even argue then?

              • Tavarin
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Clearly you don’t, since you have no concept of how much money billions is.

                • Aux@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It’s all relative. I know, that can be a hard concept to grasp for some, but billion is not that much when it’s a measly 4%.

                  • Tavarin
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    You asserted Loblaws would go under from 1 bad year.

                    That’s absolutely idiotic, Loblaws could have several bad years and have enough money in the war chest to weather that. Reletivity does not matter when they literally have billions to sustain themselves.

                    You’re inability to grasp BILLIONS is astounding. You act like it’s a million dollars.