> You can have run a company for zero profit and it can still be a benefit to society, so no the "purpose of a company is to make profit" is not necessarily true.
On one hand, fair. Technically correct.
On the other hand basically all laymen use the word "company" to mean for-profit corporation, and pretty much everyone who wants to talk about corporations that are designed not to make a profit use the term "non-profit".
I think you've ignored the context in which the comment was made.
> I think you've ignored the context in which the comment was made.
I would argue you did. The parent was being pedantic about the saying "revenue solves everything" and tried to make seem as if profit is the be-end-all. My overall point is still consistent with Drucker's "the purpose of a company is to create customers". If you're in a bull market and you hire like crazy to achieve the creation of customers, then hiring like crazy is NOT WRONG.
> On the other hand basically all laymen use the word "company" to mean for-profit corporation
P.S. - Amazon ran without profit for 10 years. Did we magically call them a non-profit for 10 years and then a company thereafter?
> and tried to make seem as if profit is the be-end-all
That statement was paired with a teleological statement about the purpose of a company. When paired with the common usage of the word "company", the statement becomes tautological. Admittedly, this isn't the most insightful realization ever, but the point from the comment was that people forget that a profit needs to be extracted.
> My overall point is still consistent with Drucker's "the purpose of a company is to create customers".
And, pray-tell, why do you think companies want customers, if not for eventual profit?
> Amazon ran without profit for 10 years. Did we magically call them a non-profit for 10 years and then a company thereafter?
Amazon made an intentional decision to re-invest profits, as a gamble that it would lead to greater profits later. That's not refraining from profit, but just operating on a time-scale that isn't quarter to quarter.
On one hand, fair. Technically correct.
On the other hand basically all laymen use the word "company" to mean for-profit corporation, and pretty much everyone who wants to talk about corporations that are designed not to make a profit use the term "non-profit".
I think you've ignored the context in which the comment was made.