Yahoo invests in Shark Finning Mega-marketplace

[Blacktip Hunter]

This is truly sad!

http://www.seashepherd.org/news/media_071004_1_article.html


Has society come to the point where only money matters and morals are a thing of the past?

[Al Kai]

Wow, this is sickening. Two thumbs down for yahoo.

[AtlantaKing]

Not to belittle the threat to sharks the long liners and finners do, but I'm at a loss to see how investing in a ecommerce holding company (who may have a subsidiery that's involved in finning) is directly contributing to the "Shark Finning Mega-marketplace". The letter from Sea Shepherd doesn't even mention that Alibaba is connected with the shark finning industry. In fact, the gist of the letter is essentially saying "the dirt is brown, the sky is blue, the grass is green, and by investing in the stock market, you're causing global warming" :rolleyes:

While I've no doubt that the Alibaba Holding Group has a wholly-owned subsidiery that sells shark fins, it does so because there is a market for it. However, what do you think the percentage of the gross annual product for that subsidiery is compared to the net worth ($6 billion) of the company? What's the alternative, that Yahoo not make the $100 million dollar investment because a few thousand dollars (a few thousandths of a percent!) might be spent on questionable practices? Maybe we should boycott Owner Hooks, whose gross annual product directly contributes to the killing of thousands of tons of fish, not just sharks...

But you have to understand: money matters. It always has, and always will. Companies do not have morals, individuals do. Perhaps a more effective tact would be to influence the buyers of shark fins (who are necessary for the industry to survive) to not buy shark fins anymore; to exercise some morals and not contribute to the demand. Take away the demand, and the market disappears. ;)

[Lipyourown]

or we can spread the word and wait for yahoo to blink...

[Blacktip Hunter]

Not to belittle the threat to sharks the long liners and finners do, but I'm at a loss to see how investing in a ecommerce holding company (who may have a subsidiery that's involved in finning) is directly contributing to the "Shark Finning Mega-marketplace". The letter from Sea Shepherd doesn't even mention that Alibaba is connected with the shark finning industry. In fact, the gist of the letter is essentially saying "the dirt is brown, the sky is blue, the grass is green, and by investing in the stock market, you're causing global warming" :rolleyes:

While I've no doubt that the Alibaba Holding Group has a wholly-owned subsidiery that sells shark fins, it does so because there is a market for it. However, what do you think the percentage of the gross annual product for that subsidiery is compared to the net worth ($6 billion) of the company? What's the alternative, that Yahoo not make the $100 million dollar investment because a few thousand dollars (a few thousandths of a percent!) might be spent on questionable practices? Maybe we should boycott Owner Hooks, whose gross annual product directly contributes to the killing of thousands of tons of fish, not just sharks...

But you have to understand: money matters. It always has, and always will. Companies do not have morals, individuals do. Perhaps a more effective tact would be to influence the buyers of shark fins (who are necessary for the industry to survive) to not buy shark fins anymore; to exercise some morals and not contribute to the demand. Take away the demand, and the market disappears. ;)

http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/4204/picture3xq3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/4204/picture3xq3.3a5d7819a2.jpg (http://g.imageshack.us/g.php?h=522&i=picture3xq3.jpg)

[AtlantaKing]

Blacktip Hunter, please read my second paragraph. Like I said, I am not suprised if they do sell shark fins, but what's their annual revenue for selling shark fins vs the rest of their products? I doubt their net annual revenue of over $250 million is comprised solely of shark fin sales.

Furthermore, after more research, Alibaba is a holding group that links buyers with sellers, much like Yahoo is a coorporation that links searchers with what they are searching for. Essentially, they don't actually sell anything, but rather hooks up the seller with the buyer and charges a fee for it. So their $250 million worth of net annual revenue is commission from what's bought and sold.

However, even if you disregard that, I'll bet shark fin sales are still a tiny part of their entire company makeup, therefore Yahoo's investment isn't primarily in the "Shark Finning Mega-marketplace", but rather a very minute portion of their investment.

Make no mistake, I am NOT defending the practice; I also do feel that the practice of finning is damaging to the population of sharks around the world. However, it is important to point the fingers at the people who are truely responsible. My point is that global commerce happens because there is a demand for something, and producers will produce that supply. In this case, there are people who demand shark fins so there are commercial fisherman who supply it. Is it a dairy farmer's fault that people want to buy milk? Is it a truckers fault that he delivers the milk from the farmer to the store? Is it the store's fault for selling the milk? Or is it the buyer who's demanding it in the first place? Who's most responsible for the commerce of the milk?

While I applaud you for your enthusiasm for conservation, I am simply stating that your anger towards this practice seems a bit misguided. Getting mad at Yahoo or Alibaba or Wal Mart or whoever will not solve anything; rather, curbing the demand for such products will have more impact. :)

[AtlantaKing]

If Yahoo's investment in that company encourages the wholesale slaughter of sharks, would their investment be encouraging the wholesale slaughter of tuna sixfold?

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q131/AKPS2006/AlibabaTunaSearch.jpg

[Blacktip Hunter]

It's kind of hard to stop the demand for shark fins in asia, if it's popularity is exploding. It would be like trying to stop the demand for chicken noodle soup in north america. Also why would a fisherman try to catch tuna or some other kind of eating fish and make a few bucks on the meat, when he could kill one shark and make a $100 on each fin?

[sand flea]

AtlantaKing, you make some good points. While the practice of finning is disgusting, these giant multinationals have investments in thousands and thousands of companies.

If they divested, someone else would pick up the stake. The real issue is changing the cultural idea that shark fin soup is good for you (or rhino horn or tiger penis soup acts like Viagra). So long as a group of people think that some endangered or threatened species has medicinal properties, there will be a demand.

And frankly, Yahoo has been sleazy in its dealings with the Chinese government. They sold out a couple of dissidents (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071107/bs_nm/yahoo_china_congress_dc) a while back just to keep the government happy and their contracts alive.

[stupidjet]

unfortunately, we are all guilty of raping our oceans. from the sport we love to the second we walk into a seafood restaurant.


you guys ever watch tuna wranglers on discovery?

[HuskyMD]

People, get your minds out of the gutter. Tiger penis, raping...man, let's go fishing already!

[stupidjet]

Lolol

[Skywoolf]

Alibaba is a site almost the same as globalsources.com that I built and managed for years (with help from a lot of staff).

The company itself does not sell any of the products. The site is a business to business site where products of manufacturers etc are listed for other businesses to contact them about buying.

When I was running the Global Sources Web division it was far bigger and more successful than Alibaba. Global sources seems to has messed up big time but Alibaba must be doing something right. You see their name everywhere on the 'net and all over Hong Kong (where the big shark fin market is).

[AtlantaKing]

That was one of the points I was trying to make. But, more importantly, if one were to read through the press release that Sea Shepherd has on their website, it's not clear at all how Alibaba and Yahoo are connected with shark finning, yet Sea Shepherd makes it seem like Yahoo is pure evil. Sensationalism at its finest :rolleyes:

[stupidjet]

i'll trade you the trunks for their tusks?

[baitslingin]

yeah , i had to shoot a couple of spotted owls and a bald eagle cuz they crappin all over my shed i have holdin my rhino horns, elephant tusks, and my beaver pelts.:D


gotta go, i got some baby seals thatneed some clubbin"

[TyatCapeSanBlas]

http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/4204/picture3xq3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/4204/picture3xq3.3a5d7819a2.jpg (http://g.imageshack.us/g.php?h=522&i=picture3xq3.jpg)

Looks pretty clear to me, they endorse sharkfins.

[Rockfish1]

so yahoo puts some of their money where it'll make them more... cancel your yahoo account if it'll make you feel better... it's all about money, clear and simple... quitcher whinin and go fishin...

[AtlantaKing]

Looks pretty clear to me, they endorse sharkfins.

Apparently you didn't read my reply and that of Skywoolf: Alibaba is a "business to business site where products of manufacturers etc are listed for other businesses to contact them about buying." Think of it like a grocery store that sells chilean seabass (commercial name for patagonian toothfish, highly endangered species); does this mean they endorse the killing of chilean seabass for food, or are they simply selling what the consumers demand? Is it a business's right and responsibility to dictate what is moral, ethical and just to a consumer? I think the decision is ultimately up to the consumer. ;)

[Lipyourown]

I think yahoo does endorse shark finning, yahoo owns 40% of that company. I agree this is mostly a consumer demand problem...but rationalizing this as good business sense does not help our oceans or our favorite pastime. AK, I hear Omega has a Public Relations position open.:p

[pksnc]

This is truly sad!

http://www.seashepherd.org/news/media_071004_1_article.html


Has society come to the point where only money matters and morals are a thing of the past?

Did anyone from Yahoo respond to the letter??

[R3d]

And frankly, Yahoo has been sleazy in its dealings with the Chinese government. They sold out a couple of dissidents (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071107/bs_nm/yahoo_china_congress_dc) a while back just to keep the government happy and their contracts alive.

Bingo...
If yahoo didn't care about human right, what make them care about shark? :rolleyes:

[stupidjet]

do you gys care that people are catching too much md blue crab too?

[TyatCapeSanBlas]

[QUOTE]Apparently you didn't read my reply and that of Skywoolf:

I did.



Alibaba is a "business to business site where products of manufacturers etc are listed for other businesses to contact them about buying."

Right

Think of it like a grocery store that sells chilean seabass (commercial name for patagonian toothfish, highly endangered species); does this mean they endorse the killing of chilean seabass for food, or are they simply selling what the consumers demand?

Well yes, they endorse it. However indirectly, they participate.


Is it a business's right and responsibility to dictate what is moral, ethical and just to a consumer? I think the decision is ultimately up to the consumer.

I agree that the root of the problem is the culture, consumer, but why allow corporations to help sustain something negative. They do dictate was is moral, ethical when it begins to affect the buisness.

[TyatCapeSanBlas]

[QUOTE]I also do feel that the practice of finning is damaging to the population of sharks around the world.

No kidding, lol.

[Skywoolf]

Blaming Alibaba is like blaming newspapers for allowing advertisements from dried seafood suppliers because the supplier may be selling dried sharks fins.

Of course everyone agrees that catching sharks, chopping their fins off and throwing them back is horrible and is reducing the shark population but I don't think blaming people like Alibaba will help stop it.

Unlike a shop, Alibaba does not sell anything anyway (except the system for sellers and buyers of any products to connect). They could maybe be persuaded to ban any mention of sharks fins but I doubt if it would have any effect on sales.