So, again, paying more for something than it's worth - isn't the extra literally wasted money? You can justify the cost however you want, tell yourself any stor

So, again, paying more for something than it's worth - isn't the extra literally wasted money? You can justify the cost however you want, tell yourself any story of why you paid over its value. But the extra money you paid is capital that could have been used for something else of similar value, and did not necessarily need to be paid. That's effectively "giving away" money. I suppose "giving away money" can be a form of "good will", when the purpose is specifically charity. But when the purpose isn't charity... it's throwing money away. To be clear, we're talking about money spent over the value of the product/service. Value is obviously kind of an amorphous thing, in that depending on various market forces the value of a single thing can swing wildly. But assuming there is a known market value, and a purchaser chooses to pay over that market value, that should - in financial terms - be considered a waste, shouldn't it? If the government knew a contractor would take $50M for a contract, and paid them $100M anyway, just for the hell of it, that would be a waste, not goodwill. I think to call it "goodwill" should imply charity, and thus be required to conform to the same rules and regulations of any charitable donation. Otherwise we should call it waste. This should make it clearer exactly what's being purchased and why. Shareholders might perk up their ears if they hear the company they invest in just wasted $50M.