 | | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update) —Richie Dulin
|
| | | (...) Privately owned is not the same as non publicly owned. (Though Lego is both non publicly owned and privately owned.) I'm not sure why I spelled it 'publically', though. Must be that speech to text software acting up again. ;-) (...) It would (...) (19 years ago, 31-Dec-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update) —Ken Nagel
|
| | | | (...) SNIP (...) Thanks for defending the "non Public part" As for "increasingly less wealth" it was exactly choosen to make the point. Lego has been loosing money for years and the family/owners have been increasingly worried about maintaining the (...) (19 years ago, 31-Dec-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update) —Richie Dulin
|
| | | | (...) No worries. However, you did make the claim that "A company exists to make a profit". The fact that Lego is a private company is neither here to there, a company does not exist to make a profit. And yet that's what you claimed. You didn't lie, (...) (19 years ago, 31-Dec-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update) —Ken Nagel
|
| | | | (...) SNIP (...) we're splitting hairs a bit however my statement about their wealth is based upon suppositon. One can only afford to loose so much and if it were not an issue they would not be worried about maintaining control.-Ken (19 years ago, 31-Dec-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
