3 ms·
Honestly I think we're in a semantics loop of sorts. I view the Tesla auto company through the same lens as Kanye West's shoe line with Adidas. Yes, Kanye and T
by 6stringmerc 11y ago
Honestly I think we're in a semantics loop of sorts. I view the Tesla auto company through the same lens as Kanye West's shoe line with Adidas. Yes, Kanye and Tesla sell as many units as they want. But, and this is a big but, neither the automotive or shoe industry are the primary field of expertise for the person at the top (Elon, Kanye) and thus can reasonably be viewed as an outsized 'hobby' until they return to their core competency. Some hobbies can be extremely profitable, no doubt.
- mikeash 11y agoThat would put SpaceX in the "hobby" group too, which I would find to be very weird. Heck, lots of pretty big, serious companies have CEOs whose expertise doesn't line up well with the business. That's why you delegate. It is just about how you define the word, though. It's obviously open to a lot of interpretation, and if your interpretation is one way, I can hardly say it's wrong, even if I might say it should be a different way.
- 6stringmerc 11y agoWell John Carmack spent 10 good years on Armadillo Aerospace and eventually went back to his day job, so I'm still comfortable viewing certain enterprises by people with means as being 'hobbies' as a general term, insofar as if they wake up one morning and decide to do something else, they still have money, a home, and other opportunities. The IRS has some pretty interesting perspectives on 'hobbies' as well, as I've discovered over time.
- mikeash 11y agoI'd have no problem calling Armadillo a hobby company, they never had any paying customers (I think) and never produced anything of practical value. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I'd personally say SpaceX fit that category through the Falcon 1 days, but moved past it once they moved to the Falcon 9. YMMV.