Quote:
Originally Posted by Relentless
Jesse,
In business like anything else you must make decisions based on the information you have available to you.
|
correct. that's so basic I'm not sure why it would need stating?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relentless
When someone offers you a set of terms... that's what they say they will do. When they offer you up to a certain amount per sale, that's what they say they will pay. However you will never know if they will actually pay you when the bill comes due,
|
this is where I think there's a disconnect between the thread topic and your posts in it. you're presenting a position you've argued before; that it's useless to engage in supposition in determining the value of a given sponsor. I agree with you on that
that's not the scenario presented in sarettah's op though. he's referring to a hypothetical situation wherein one discovers that a company with which one shares a lucrative relationship has been
proven to be knowingly engaging in dishonest behavior aka unethical practice.
thus the question (as I see it, anyways) involves an additional factor not found in the scenario you often present. from where I'm standing your answers thus far address a different question based on a different set of facts.
the additional factor here is not just whether one currently earn the most per click with said sponsor in a haze of gossip, but whether one chooses to continue to work with people who have been
proven to engage in shady ish.
I was curious as to your stance on that. that's all.
anyways, interesting topic