3 ms·
>you can run a business without trying to make as much profit as possible but you can not run a business that produces nothing This is not an even comparison.
by ToValueFunfetti 3y ago
>you can run a business without trying to make as much profit as possible but you can not run a business that produces nothing
This is not an even comparison. A business that produces the minimum amount (0) of product/service should be compared against a business that produces the minimum amount (-$assets) of profit, which corresponds to 0 revenue. Neither business can be run, but the former can at least sit on its assets or pivot into actually making something.
A business can also produce too much and collapse (see Atari and DeLorean), but it can't collapse from too much profit.
It makes more sense to put the emphasis on profit, I think.
- jorvi 3y agoYou can run a business with negative profit (say, to capture market share or using a loss leader), but you can’t run a business with negative production. Production is essential to a business and profit is not, strange as that may seem.
- ToValueFunfetti 3y agoWhat does negative production mean to you here? I can run an incineration business or a demolition derby, as long as I get paid to do so. If that doesn't count as negative production (because I'm producing space or entertainment value; potentially at a loss to acquire market share), what does? If negative production is a physical impossibility, the claim that you can't run a business with it doesn't tell us anything about business.
- danbruc 3y agoThis is not an even comparison. This was not intended to be one or at best in the following sense. Making products and making profits are two features of businesses, the first one is essential, the second one is dispensable. No products, no business. No profits, no problem. Even more, no profits is where every business would ideally be, in a functioning market competition should drive the margins towards zero, the price should be equal to the costs of production.