I'd be curious if they simply couldn't compete, and they recognized that. Ie, their competition is heavily Google, Microsoft, Amazon, etc which offer competing products as part of their suite. Yet, Google/etc doesn't really care about file sharing/storage. It's just one component in a much larger model.
I'd be curious if, due to cloud prices/etc, Dropbox didn't feel they could actually sustain a competitive price and become profitable. So they're trying to expand to other avenues and find something that works.
Who provides dropboxes actual storage? That provider could just keep squeezing dropbox until the provider creates a copy of dropbox or has them bent over just to the point of them switching to another provider. Maybe dropbox should have been building their own data centers in the mean time, cutting their overhead. That idea of restraining growth in favor of long term stability probably wouldn't sit so well with the shareholders who want their pie tomorrow.
They do have their own storage infrastructure now. It's just a very low margin business and newer entrants like Wasabi are constantly pushing the edge in raw pricing.
It's a lack of focus on increasing sales throughput. They should have looked to resolve bottlenecks between when a lead first hits their website and when a sale is finalised.
There's always something along that process that is poor and holding back the rest of the process. An increase in throughput = increased sales.
You don't think their funnel is optimized already? The truth is that Google and Microsoft have the mind shares and products that integrate well with their respective eco systems already. Google Drive and OneDrive just work and are highly affordable already.
But if you already pay for Neflix's service and this is just another part of it. Advertising is supposed to sell, or upsell a product, which isn't what the ranking system does.
Well if we're really stretching the logic, watching something is what signals Netflix Corporate to keep it on the service, thus you are _technically_ funding that specific piece of content.
Where I live, firefighters are almost exclusively volunteer. They provide their own vehicles and much of their own equipment. There are grants and subsidies, but it’s still a huge investment. They are paid from those grants, which after department-level expenses are disbursed to individuals proportionally to the number of incidents they responded to.
If I call for law enforcement, there’s a decent chance I’ll get a “Justice of the Peace” or a Constable instead of a government employee. These are elected positions, and either unpaid or offer so little compensation no one would ever choose it as a career.
Mail is delivered by rural carriers, who are contract workers. They provide their own vehicles and equipment as well.
All of the above is pretty typical for most of the US (geographically). I wouldn’t go so far as to call it a free market system - after all, what funding there is for these services comes from the government - but I also wouldn’t call it “socialized”.
Firefighters and police officers are not socialized, they do not produce anything, a key tenet of socialism; they are extensions of the government in that they are operational activities that would be carried out by any type of government.
Socialism is the public ownership of the means of production.
They certainly do produce something. Performing a service is production. This service could be and often is provided by a private enterprise, and in that case, it's not socialism. When it's paid for by taxes and controlled by elected representatives, it's socialism. Just like schools, libraries and roads.
If socialism is the public ownership of the means of production, how exactly is a government controlled healthcare program for all considered, "Socialism"?
When it comes to insurance, what exactly is the "means of production" there that is being owned by the people?
Is any publicly owned and managed entity socialist?
I commented on this ticket over a year ago, and frequently get updates about how other users are switching over to other platforms due to this issue. The comments are highly enjoyable in sharing our frustration with the lack of response from Atlassian.
