> that is true, but it's also irrelevant, since typical consulting firms actually charge much more. Again, it's irrelevant if you redefine "typical consulting

> that is true, but it's also irrelevant, since typical consulting firms actually charge much more. Again, it's irrelevant if you redefine "typical consulting company" as one of a clearly atypical group of big-name firms with tens to hundreds of thousands of employees. > Secondly he asserts that consulting doesn't scale. He makes two assertions. First, that with all the details accounted for, your profit will likely be half of what a naive assumption would find. And second, that as a founder you'd end up doing a lot of stuff outside your core competency or interest. At no point does he say, "Given these facts, it's clear that consulting cannot scale." If he had, sure, you could take two seconds, point out a single point to the contrary, and feel good about "demolishing" an easily refuted argument. He didn't, so we're back where we started.