1. if a company is selling something the reason they continue to do so is to make money from those sales. there is no other reason to sell.
2. if a company has to ship something they always charge a shipping fee. If they have to pack something in order to ship it, they charge a handling fee.
if you have purchased something online recently you would see those line items on your bill.
3. the kick backs are not legal, and they are discussed on the most recent PP video (cited and linked above in this thread).
4. people do sit on several boards. but to sit on the boards of companies that have a common propriatory interest and to vote on items relating to their other company is considered a conflict of interest, and would be illegal to do so.
In otherwords, it is 'one hand washing the other'.
The reason it's not a good business to have even the appearance of such conflicts is because there are regulatory laws that prohibit such things.
For example: If the chairman of the board of a church also sits on the board of a bank, then they cannot vote or take part in any banking discussions that effect that church.
the same thing is true if a member of a school board were also a member of the local county board of suprvisors. that person could not discuss or vote on matters concerning the school at the supervisor's meeting, nor could they vote or discuss mattters concerning the county at the school board meeting.
as you can see, to have one person filling two slots, each with a common interest in the other, creates a gap in both governing bodies as well as also creating an opportunity to have prejudicial knowledge concern both organizations.
as for Teapot and Watergate, history shows what can happen when the wrong people have access to the wrong information, and use that access for the wrong purposes.
I thought that by adding those above examples which are apart from the drama of PP, that it might be easier for you to discern what the problem is.
