3 ms·
I can see why you'd make that analogy, but that wasn't quite what I was trying to say. I just meant that not all expenses are created equal. Plenty of companie
by SeanAnderson 1y ago
I can see why you'd make that analogy, but that wasn't quite what I was trying to say. I just meant that not all expenses are created equal.
Plenty of companies have high burn rates due to high R&D costs. It can make them look unprofitable on paper, but it's a tactic used to scale quicker, get economies of scale, higher leverage in negotiating, etc. It's not a requirement that they invest in R&D indefinitely. In contrast, if a company is paying a heavy amount of interest on loans (think: WeWork), it's not nearly as practical for them to cut away at their spending to find profitability.
- ares623 1y agoApologies for the snark. I don't think they can stop the 3 things you mentioned though. - Stopping R&D means their top engineers and scientists will go elsewhere - Stopping marketing means they will slowly lose market share. I don't care for marketing personally but I can appreciate its importance in a corporation - Stopping/reducing compensation will also make them lose people The costs are an inherent part of the company. It can't exist without it. Sure, they can adjust some levers a little bit here and there, but not too much or it all comes crumbling down.
- rhetocj23 1y agoIts always a relief to read posts like these on here amid the noise.