Well, companies are different from people. Companies do everything they do because they feel that in the long or short run, it's beneficial to the motivation for everything they do and that is the profit motive. Companies don't care about much at all that doesn't compromise their ability to generate revenue and profits. Companies may talk about and lobby for things on the basis of morality, legality, etc., but the fact is that one could walk all over their legal and moral rights if doing so were in the end more profitable to the company.
Individuals would not countenance such a thing, regardless of the monetary impact. How often, for example, have you felt wrong and pursued redress saying, "it's not about the money; it's the principle." The only principles a company has are those that favor its economic interests.
So, when I wrote the passage you quoted above, I did so with the awareness I have of what catalyzes corporate behavior. Having a CPA, now an MBA and 30+ years of management consulting experience, I'm in a position to speak to what motivates companies to do what they do. Fifty pus years of living has similarly shown me that one cannot generalize in the same way about people and what motivates them.
I ask you to look at all manners of human behavior -- criminal behavior is probably the easiest to consider -- and ask yourself if you've been exposed to substantively the same sets of factors as another individual and yet chosen a different course of action. As a fairly straigntforward illustration I point to very, very wealthy people who have been caught shoplifting. (
http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/...t-shoplifting/) I don't care what reason those people gave for why the stole the merchandise, the fact is that millions of other people crave the same outcome yet obtain it differently.
I offer Swatch Group/ETA's decision to cease making ETA movements available to non-Swatch Group companies. Sure, N. Hayek said that one reason for doing that was to help catalyze the watch industry and the value of watches to adopt once again the great and long honored traditions associated with the watchmaking craft. I believe that was
a reason why he made that decision, but I doubt at all that was the main reason.
Long story short: it's in Swatch's economic interest not to make ETA movements available to every "Tom, Dick and Harry" company that pops up wanting to buy them and put them inside their own watch case. The reason for that is that with watches and their ability to perform, the motor matters more than the case. The case/dial drives why one wants "this one" and not "that one." The motor is why one feels comfortable that one or the other watch will serve one well and operate without trouble. As some folks have noticed, the prices for ETA-inside watches has skyrocketed in recent years, as has the price of ETA-clone-inside (Sellita, Soporod, Sea-gull,
et alI) watches.
And that's the thing about corporate behavior...no company is going to directly say "we're doing this because it's more profitable for us." They are going to call upon their marketing departments to "spin" the story to make it more palatable to the people who must bear the cost of the companies' actions and preferences.
Are there folks who buy fake watches so they can pass them off, innocuously or nefariously, as the real thing? Of course there are. But to generalize that that's why most folks do so is unfair to individuals who don't have a shady motivation. I don't want to be fair to another man. I don't care about being fair to corporations because at the end of the day, I know that a company will choose what's in its shareholders' best interest before it chooses what's fair to me or people in general. Look at BMW...they had to be shamed into issuing a recall for their HPFP issues.
All the best.
PS
I appreciate that you were thinking as you read my post. Thoughtful comments always make for better discussions, so I'm glad you shared your thoughts. I look forward to seeing other posts from you on B-post.