Zero Powers wrote:
> >From: EvMick@aol.com
> >In a message dated 4/9/00 7:00:02 PM Central Daylight Time,
> > > often wondered what would happen if
> > > Bill Gates moved his headquarters and his jobs out of the US and into
> > >
> > > of a number of countries where he would be welcomed with open arms.
> >I wonder why he doesn't?....maybe the cayman islands...or the
> >bahama's....hardship locations like that....
> >He'd own the place...the locals would love it...his employees would love
> >it...what would be the downside?....except for janet reno i mean?
> Running away would not have much benefit for MS. The great majority of MS
> customers are in the US. Therefore, their business is going to have a
> substantial effect on commerce in the US and they would still be subject to
> the Sherman Act:
> Of course if they moved to some developing country they could fire all their
> high paid American workers and train and hire the poor locals and not have
> to be bothered with such annoyances as the US minimum wage law and organized
> labor. But I'm sure that would be PR disaster for them. That would
> probably be the best thing in the world for Linux and Apple.
Not so. Foreign companies cannot have anti-trust actions brought against
them, only US based companies can be charged with such 'crimes'.
Especially if MS has no actual offices left here, they are merely an OEM
supplier to PC makers and software distributors, or they just distribute
over the ineternet. Foreign traders can only be charged with anti-trust
crimes if they are American citizens or American based corporations, or
the American based divisions of foreign corporations.
Now, Bill would be dumb to fire all of his employees, however buying an
island and developing it for use by as many of his current employees
that want to move there, then simply subcontract the rest who want to
stay in Redmond, would be rather easy.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:09:12 MDT