You don’t have a fiduciary responsibility to maximize profit, or anything like that. You have a responsibility to act in accordance to company rules and guidelines, and to act in the company’s interest, not your own.
There is no requirement to burn to company down to maximize short-term profits, like some people think. That’s usually at the expense of long-term profits anyway, so it could be better for profits to do something better for the customer.
You’re only required to act “ethically” and keep the company’s interests above your own.
If the company has a goal to make more money every year, then you can justify a lot of actions in that pursuit. And once they have a monopoly you kinda don’t have many options, so they can push more.
Saying they have a responsibility to keep you on the app may sound silly, but app user churn is most likely measured and has some goal around it. And if a goal is set around that churn then they very much have an obligation to keep you on there as long as possible.
There’s the alternative of trying to obtain more users, or also to retain users by being a better service (although it has to appeal to a different demographic than those trying to leave for this though).
They have a pretty universally bad name now, so obtaining new users only gets harder, and a lot of people leave even without finding a long term match because the service is shit. They can optimize for these factors without burning the place down.
They have no requirement to grow year over year either. That has nothing to do with fiduciary responsibility. It just keeps stock value growing. Prioritizing long term health at the expense of short term gains is perfectly fine a legal.
“Rather than require specific outcomes–such as achieving maximum share price–fiduciary duties are largely about conduct, process, and motivation”
You don’t have a fiduciary responsibility to maximize profit, or anything like that. You have a responsibility to act in accordance to company rules and guidelines, and to act in the company’s interest, not your own.
There is no requirement to burn to company down to maximize short-term profits, like some people think. That’s usually at the expense of long-term profits anyway, so it could be better for profits to do something better for the customer.
You’re only required to act “ethically” and keep the company’s interests above your own.
If the company has a goal to make more money every year, then you can justify a lot of actions in that pursuit. And once they have a monopoly you kinda don’t have many options, so they can push more.
Saying they have a responsibility to keep you on the app may sound silly, but app user churn is most likely measured and has some goal around it. And if a goal is set around that churn then they very much have an obligation to keep you on there as long as possible.
There’s the alternative of trying to obtain more users, or also to retain users by being a better service (although it has to appeal to a different demographic than those trying to leave for this though).
They have a pretty universally bad name now, so obtaining new users only gets harder, and a lot of people leave even without finding a long term match because the service is shit. They can optimize for these factors without burning the place down.
They have no requirement to grow year over year either. That has nothing to do with fiduciary responsibility. It just keeps stock value growing. Prioritizing long term health at the expense of short term gains is perfectly fine a legal.