Basic erroneous economics, sure. 80 hr weeks == all the people at your company who have substantial talent and experience go elsewhere because they can make th

Basic erroneous economics, sure. 80 hr weeks == all the people at your company who have substantial talent and experience go elsewhere because they can make the same money by working fewer hours. Basic economics. 80 hr weeks == vastly diminished possibility of hiring people who have families, other interests, or "lives" outside of work, so your hiring pool is diminished. 80 hr weeks == everyone is overworked and tired, there's no slack in the system to allow for doing things the right way, effective productivity is actually much decreased because the quality of work is low and the opportunity to pay down technical debt is absent. Any amount of extra productivity that could be had by working more hours is eaten up by people needing to "live" at work (pay bills, communicate with friends and relatives, eat, etc.) and by constantly having to pay the interest on technical debt that can't be paid down. 80 hr weeks == no ability to innovate, no agility, so you get stuck plugging away on N-1 ideas while your competitors who have slack have spent their free time spinning up an N+1 prototype that is going to disrupt your entire business.