13 ms·
Good point. I don't doubt that some form of what was described plays a role, but it's interesting that such a obvious (in retrospect ;) ) point was apparently
by jamesbritt 15y ago
Good point. I don't doubt that some form of what was described plays a role, but it's interesting that such a obvious (in retrospect ;) ) point was apparently not considered.
So now I'm wondering why this is only obvious once mentioned, and to what degree this sort of market/real-world ignorance features in various decisions about stating a business. You often don't know what you don't know, so how does one avoid these sorts of blinders?
One answer: try stuff where you can fail fast and (hopefully) cheap.
- cagey 15y agoplays a role Try "is 100% responsible for"; if (in CA, USA) I decided to defy or ignore the zoning bureaucracy and open a gas station (or any "bricks and mortar" business within city limits), I think the 'crats would apply "corrective measures" (up to and including jail time) within days (if not hours or minutes). Although in practice, they'd notice long before that I was missing the multitudinous appropriate permits, and bring my efforts to a crashing halt. As to why this most obvious explanation was missed: maybe the authors have thus far in their lives avoided contact with such bureaucracies?
- randallsquared 15y agoYou copied the part of gparent's post that referred to game theory, not zoning.