There are, however, a not inappreciable number of people who do exactly that, not necessarily with yours, but with many others' products, which is why these days, the market consequences that should come with poor and consumer-hostile actions, have a habit of not actually coming true. And there's a just-as-vocal segment of the internet population who seek to encourage and enforce a kind of uncritical forced optimism, and thus further prevent any serious consequences of such actions.
So...I did not disagree with this...so...we are agreeing?
There's a recent photo that's become rather infamous, a picture of the userlist for a Steam group boycotting Modern Warfare 2, where over half the list is currently online playing the game.
Actually...that was what I was saying...obviously I was not clear enough.
Thing is though, what a business might think is a "legitimate business decision" and what the consumer thinks is best for him are not necessarily going to agree.
I was not saying they should. However, a well run business does not make a legitimate business decision that destroys its customer base. Before you froth at the mouth, I said
well run, not that it does not happen. If you truly take actions in business that alienates your customers then you will soon be out of business. If you instead, provide a service that they desire within a framework that is sustainable, then you have a business. Now, if you make a business call like "I am going to move towards supporting 4e" and your customer base says "No way!" and backs it up by not purchasing, then you either need to regrow your customer base (very expensive, difficult to do often) or go out of business. Now, on the other side of this if you make the above decision and rabid anti-4e boy comes out of the wood work frothing with spittle laden outrage at the contemptible presumption on the part of HIS game company...well, someone is going to be pissed off every time. Note, I am specifically not talking about the legitimate customer decision not to purchase any products from that company due to a shift away from their preferred material.
Especially when the values system is as such that it views any action whatsoever, regardless of consequences, is "legitimate" as long as it makes them a quick buck.
This is so...front-loaded with assumptions as to make it nigh useless. Yes, as stated, IF the company is making all its decisions based on what will make it a "quick buck" it will lead to troubles but that comes around to what I was saying earlier about "well run" businesses.
We just went through a massive economic crash as a result of a whole lot of those sorts of "legitimate business decisions".
No, really, the way you are casting this discussion, it was not legitimate business decisions, at least not in my opinion nor in the opinions of any of my business or economics profs. They were very risky, edgy business decisions. If they had not been bailed out, they would have ended those companies.
However, this is getting kind of close to political debate. To steer it back on topic, I would say, in plainer English, that there are legitimate customer reactions to business decisions of a company and there are poor reactions. A separate issue is whether they are deserved or not, and this can only be determined on the actual actions of the companies involved. A third issue you raised would be whether a company's decisions are reprehensible. It would seem you are saying that all companies, regardless of their action or motives, are wrong and evil and out to bankrupt any who purchase their products. Do I understand your position? I would argue that his is not the case. Some companies yes, just as their are some people who will kill you to watch you die, but to paint is as though all companies function this way seems disingenuous.