These billionaires usually buy money losing newspapers, or social networks, for personal reasons. If I was going to bet on it I’d very much lean on a personal motive beyond money.
So without consideration for upside[0], one of the most emotionless decisions a top executive can make is when there is no downside versus when there is.
[0] After all, further upside is not necessary if you already have experienced enough to where the needle can not move any further.
Are you confusing revenue with profit? Yeah, a lot of money pumps in one end of Amazon retail and out the other, but there is very little margin: the $550+ billion in revenue on the retail side, as I understand, brings in significantly less net than the $90 billion in revenue on the cloud side.
And government contracts, where one might expect support or opposition from a potential cheif executige who has made overt promises of purges and other uses of office to punish enemies and reward friends to make a big difference, are an important part of that (not just that one $1B contract.)
...probably at a way lower profit range than most corporate contracts given how demanding gov deals are.
Citation needed
I thought they had fabulous margins
Am I wrong
It's always been the case. That's how Supreme Court works.
[0] https://www.npr.org/2024/10/22/nx-s1-5161480/trump-media-thr...
You write this, apparently sincerely, as if the other side of politics do not and will not attack their political opponents.