Thanks for the comment. I think though that it's important to pay attention to what I'm actually saying and not react purely on emotion. Having an emotional r

Thanks for the comment. I think though that it's important to pay attention to what I'm actually saying and not react purely on emotion. Having an emotional response might get me labeled as a troll, but it also shows from the fact that pg, and now you, are insinuating a point and then arguing that, instead of actually countering what I'm directly saying. For example: >The author describes three traits of businesses that will fail during a downturn Actually, I don't say that anywhere. What I do say is: "When you're adjusting to survive, be sure to stay well clear of the following traps below". All three of those items are risky positions to place oneself in, and they become doubly so when money isn't flowing as fast as it is now. I don't see how pointing out risks is contradicts the fact that you can be successful in mitigating those risks. >Google, anyone? Google is an anomaly. It's very bad strategy to formulate expectations based on the performance of an exception to the rule. Unless you are that one company, odds are you'll end up in the heap of has beens. Besides, I point out in the article that Google did in fact innovate right through a recession to great effect.