WhiteWingedDove-

WhiteWingedDove- t1_j0o55or wrote

Maybe there is something to what you're saying from a psychological standpoint but microeconomics teaches us that firms are in business to make a profit and that is the overriding principle that guides every decision from the smallest, seemingly insignificant decision to major ones. In reality, every decision is a decision where the "bottom line is at stake."

​

So, ultimately, according the microecon, the decision was made to pursue copyright claims against mom and pops because the firm thought it would boost profits. Probably because they thought they could get some kind of monetary settlement, or more likely (in my opinion), because they thought any press it would bring would be good for sales.

​

And that thought doesn't necessarily have to be true for us to say the profit motive is behind it. Tons of business decisions are made because stakeholders *thought* they would boost profits, but actually ended up losing money.

1

WhiteWingedDove- t1_j0j0u3g wrote

It's really not a big deal. I don't even believe in copyright laws at all, but if a company trying to stop others from using a logo is the worst you can find, that's really weak tea bro.

Can't you dig deeper and find they used slave labor or busted a unionization drive or something?

0

WhiteWingedDove- t1_iyxzhql wrote

My guess is this thing is going to outlive you.

The 316L denotes the specific kind of stainless steel used. 316L has molybdenum in it and has enhanced resistance to corrosion from chloride and acids (very important when many municipalities add chlorine to the water during treatment).

The most common stainless steel finish, 304, isn't as long-lasting as 316 and hence why you still see rust on stainless steel over time. All stainless steel isn't created the same.

ETA: The type of steel can also go towards explaining the high cost of this razor too, as the increased nickel and molybdenum content makes 316 steel 40% more expensive than plain old 304 steel.

4