4 ms·
Yes, but when you look around at multi-billionaires, they generally didn't diversify. Ronald Wayne supposedly sold his 10% share of Apple for $800. “Put all y
by perl4ever 5y ago
Yes, but when you look around at multi-billionaires, they generally didn't diversify.
Ronald Wayne supposedly sold his 10% share of Apple for $800.
“Put all your eggs in one basket—and watch that basket.” -Andrew Carnegie
- skinnymuch 5y agoThere’s a significant amount of luck involved with what you’re pointing out. In the situation of owning a relatively small amount of a company, the actions of billionaires have nothing to do with the actions of your average non-early employee.
- UncleMeat 5y agoIf your goal is to become a multi-billionaire then sure, you need to take way more risk. But I'd wager that this is not most people's goal. If your goal is to accumulate enough wealth to have a safe retirement portfolio then you don't need to take the large risk for the large potential maximum benefit.
- perl4ever 5y agoThe context seems to be reallocating several hundred million dollars. I agree that at least 1% of it, if a person had nothing else, which they probably would, should be put aside for retirement. I thought that went without saying. Nevertheless, keeping 99% in one company would not be diversified.
- JoeAltmaier 5y agoYes, but that's survivor bias. "I put it all on 27 and spun the wheel! That's clearly the only way to go."
- perl4ever 5y agoAs far as I'm aware, survivorship bias is misestimating the probability of success. It's not inherently bias to disagree about whether a risk is worth taking. The choice depends heavily on the consequences, the relative value of success and failure, not just the probabilities.