3 ms·

A similar story: I bought AMZN because I thought the Kindle was amazing. I correctly foresaw that it would get cheaper and better (despite people sneering that

A similar story: I bought AMZN because I thought the Kindle was amazing. I correctly foresaw that it would get cheaper and better (despite people sneering that $400 for the gen 1 was obscene and that they preferred paper), and that AMZN could become one of the biggest sellers of books just like AAPL became one of the leading sellers of music with the iTunes store. At the end of the day though, I think I made money on the stock for other reasons (AWS; Prime; AMZN eating all of retail). Similarly, your family member seems to have made a good bet for all of the wrong reasons. So I'm not sure your example is a great one.

mruts 8y ago
Maybe, but delivering exceptional value in one area (books), is probably correlated to providing value in other areas (AWS, retail, etc). You could imagine a similar situation with Google. You buy google stock because they created a really good search engine. But being able to deliver a great search engine also, it seems, is correlated to providing great advertising services, cloud computing, and email. Being good at one thing is probably correlated to being good at other things (especially if they are related). While being bad at one thing is probably correlated with being bad at other things.