8 ms·
No, because as a startup founder and now investor, I would work day and night to find another "loophole" for easy money. There are hundreds of thousands of peop
by chronicy292 9y ago
No, because as a startup founder and now investor, I would work day and night to find another "loophole" for easy money. There are hundreds of thousands of people who think like this
Sustainable income? If you're getting a check for $10 million, do you care?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- pdpi 9y agoThe point is that, as a society, we should care. And that means putting in the right checks and balances that at the individual level we still care.
- amigoingtodie 9y agoSmall kids do not need, nor should they have, smartphones.
- devdad 9y agoA bit off topic but true. You don't deserve down votes in my book.
- coldtea 9y ago>Sustainable income? If you're getting a check for $10 million, do you care? Depends on the kind of values you have.
- mike-cardwell 9y agoI would create an unsustainable business in return for $10 million. Does that make me a bad person?
- nhaehnle 9y agoIf you have to ask, the answer is probably yes.
- amigoingtodie 9y agoNo. It is called an exit-strategy. Mark Cuban became a billionaire by selling a domain name to Yahoo. Now he is a reality TV star.
- ethbro 9y agoTo be fair, he used some of that stardom to get Shark Tank to drop the automatic 5% equity grant just for appearing on the show, including retroactively to previous entrepreneurs. https://www.inc.com/will-yakowicz/mark-cuban-forces-shark-tank-to-remove-equity-clause.html https://www.inc.com/will-yakowicz/mark-cuban-forces-shark-ta...
- coldtea 9y agoThat's orthogonal. You can have an exit-strategy, or become a billionaire, or a reality tv star, and achieve it by acting bad.
- AstralStorm 9y agoSelfish for sure. Soneone is going to pay that 10 million. And I bet your service does not provide equivalent worth to the community. Heck, probably net negative even without the money.
- pault 9y agoIf you designed the business knowing that it would collapse at some point in the future, and knowingly sold it to someone that would be left holding the bag, I think that would make you a very unethical person. If you did this, real people would be hurt by your decisions, and you would have continued to execute your plan knowing this. Maybe you just haven't thought through the consequences, but I wouldn't want to be friends with someone that acted that way. Edit: Since it appears that I wasn't clear enough, I'm saying that misrepresenting the value of a business to employees, customers, and investors is unethical. If everyone involved knows the venture is doomed to fail and you can still retire off the profits, I don't see a problem with that.
- philipov 9y agoYou can't build a policy on "Maybe people will just be nice?". Aggregate economic decisions are not based on values, they are based on systematic incentives. If society operated on altruistic values, it would have never invented government.
- coldtea 9y ago>If society operated on altruistic values, it would have never invented government. This assumes there are no coordination, planning and other services that the government offers. At best, society would never had invented the police.
- HelloNurse 9y agoAn obvious third exit option is proven and popular: be bought and ousted by uncommonly optimistic investors or competitors, so that scaling, profitability etc. become their problem (even if founders linger at their former company as employees with negligible stock).
- vog 9y agoHow is that different from option 2?
- AstralStorm 9y agoThe company still stays as a separate entity. Call it option 3. The exit for the board is either sale or bankruptcy.