871
Solar panels for surveillance but none for affordable power (lemmy.today)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/workreform@lemmy.world
58 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 2 months ago* (5 children)

Perhaps you should do a cursory search on the companie's financials so you understand. They passed the $500 million mark in annual revenue at the halfway point of this year after $300 million last year. That means they've likely already passed a billion in total revenue and are just getting started. My small town found the cash to put up $500,000 in flock cameras in a single year... and they are just getting started.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (4 children)

    "Annual recurring revenue (ARR) is a key metric used by subscription and software-as-a-service (SaaS) businesses to measure the predictable and recurring revenue expected over a 12-month period"

    They are expecting to bring 500 million this year in revenue. Thats what I said, and that's what you said. Not 500 million for the first half of the year and another 500 million the rest of the year. 500 million total.

    Perhaps you should do a slightly less cursory search.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    Still well over 1 billion in revenue over first few years and growing rapidly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

    Just barely over a billion actually. We don't have good numbers from 2017 to 2023, but from 2023 onwards they're basically spot on 1 billion.

    Regardless, not all of that money comes from groups that should be building solar power stations, and the amount of money spent on them is not nearly on the scale required to switch the grid to green energy in a reasonable timeframe. That was the whole point, you don't understand the financials, you don't understand the sources. You have a valid frustration about where and how public funds are being spent, but you're barking up the wrong tree, and you've picked a rather small tree at that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    I don't think anyone anywhere mentioned redirecting flock cameras funds would even approach switching the grid to green energy. Just a misuse of funds that could help in the goal of switching proving that governments have funds but continue to choose not to use them for solar. My town could have weatherized hundreds of homes for the cost it wasted in flock...just this year.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    I don’t think anyone anywhere mentioned redirecting flock cameras funds would even approach switching the grid to green energy.

    Couldn’t the billions have been used for solar infrastructure?

    That's how I interpreted your statement actually. It came off to me as "the government is spending so much money on Flock when that huge sum could be used to setup a lot of solar energy generation". The points again though, is that it's not that much money (in comparison to other government contractors), a big chunk of it comes from private sources not public anyway, and it would be a small drop in a big bucket of money that is needed to have a meaningful effect on national solar power generation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent