27 Oct 09
Originally posted by rwingettActually it is a good decision. In fact, that is what President Obama is working on for the US.
Due to rising costs in the wake of Iceland's financial crisis, and the country's sparse population, McDonald's has announced it will close its three locations in Iceland, never to return. Should Icelanders weep or rejoice over this decision?
27 Oct 09
Originally posted by rwingettYou forgot to mention Icelands protectionism which means everyone in Iceland has to pay to maintain inefficient local businesses. MacDs have their own standards to maintain which local suppliers couldn't raise themselves to. The people of Iceland are poorer for it.
Due to rising costs in the wake of Iceland's financial crisis, and the country's sparse population, McDonald's has announced it will close its three locations in Iceland, never to return. Should Icelanders weep or rejoice over this decision?
27 Oct 09
Originally posted by joneschrIt's all about currency exchange rates. A burger would need to be very expensive for icelanders in order for macdonalds to make the profits they want. Also, apparently, macdonalds don't like the complex business laws over there, and can't really be bothered with all that expensive paperwork.
Sounds like a bum economy is an excuse. McDonalds normally thrives on bad economy. You know, empty wallet = inexpensive food.
27 Oct 09
Originally posted by twiceaknightthey allegedly prefer the break rape and escape business model pioneered back in the day when victims of sexual assault were usually considered to be the cause of their affliction (they were asking for it, they should not have sent mixed signals, they were dressed immodestly etc...)
It's all about currency exchange rates. A burger would need to be very expensive for icelanders in order for macdonalds to make the profits they want. Also, apparently, macdonalds don't like the complex business laws over there, and can't really be bothered with all that expensive paperwork.
27 Oct 09
Originally posted by kmax87Sorry, no matter how many times I read your post I can't see the connection between our posts. Or are you making the unconnected point that they are without morality? If so I agree. They sold their souls for money, and only behave ethically if the law requires it or if it leads to more profits due to better PR.
they allegedly prefer the break rape and escape business model pioneered back in the day when victims of sexual assault were usually considered to be the cause of their affliction (they were asking for it, they should not have sent mixed signals, they were dressed immodestly etc...)