3 ms·
This shouldn't really be that surprising. There's a stronger incentive to do the latter than the former. If it's plausible enough to take the latter strategy
by treyd 1y ago
This shouldn't really be that surprising. There's a stronger incentive to do the latter than the former. If it's plausible enough to take the latter strategy that the expected value of the strategy is higher, then that will be the strategy preferentially taken.
- hschne 1y agoI think that's a misconception. It's quite possible that the expected value for most companies over, say 10 years, is overall higher. I obviously have no data, call it a hunch We just don't hear enough about companies growing steadily and profitably over the years, but over report on the unicorns and smash hits.
- treyd 1y agoInvestors do have that data, and they clearly seem to disagree through their investment strategies, and it seems to be turning out well for them enough for that strategy to be consistently profitable, so your hunch may be wrong.
- danaris 1y agoInvestors are pushed to care about this quarter's revenue, and discouraged from caring about anything else, by a host of warped and unintentional incentives. I don't think we can use their behavior as an indicator of what's optimal over the long run.