> Metrics only indicate what people think they want, not what they need. Metrics are only accurate if you look for trends. Long-lasting businesses don't rely on

> Metrics only indicate what people think they want, not what they need. Metrics are only accurate if you look for trends. Long-lasting businesses don't rely on trends. This really does not make any sense. Metrics as a general concept can and do encapsulate all the positive things you just mentioned (long-lasting value, what people need, etc). Just because a subset is shitty/misleading does not invalidate my argument. Obviously an investor must sift shitty metrics from good metrics, and shitty teams (that appear good) from good teams. > Facebook, just like AirBnb, make a lot of sense. You don't need metrics to understand that. Firstly, hindsight is 20/20, so that's easy for you to say. Obviously everyone now believes Facebook is a good idea; the same is not true back in 2004. Good investors recognize that they cannot necessarily tell the good ideas from the bad ideas, so they focus on team/metrics. The most revolutionary ideas typically seem like bad ideas. > Do you want to live in a world where investors all throw their money at the next Instagram? Or do you want to live in a world where they invest in the next Xerox Parc? You have not provided a reason we cannot have a world with both. Those are not mutually exclusive.