4 ms·

The situations are very different. The investors faced a dilemma, they had to make a decision. They made a poor choice (perhaps only in retrospect), and missed

by gizmo 17y ago

The situations are very different. The investors faced a dilemma, they had to make a decision. They made a poor choice (perhaps only in retrospect), and missed out on a bunch of money because of it. The RIAA doesn't decide whether people pay or download. The people face the dilemma: download and possibly face consequences, or pay. Since the RIAA doesn't have a decision to make, there is no missed opportunity either. Or take a poker analogy. Suppose you have the best possible hand at show down. If you then muck your cards regardless, you forfeit the pot. This is a missed opportunity, and definitely also a loss.

jacquesm 17y ago
A 'loss' would have been if they had to write off that money instead of recoup their loan. That it would have earned them more in the long term is not a loss, that is stretching the definition of the word loss beyond the breaking point. The RIAA makes a similar argument, they count every mp3 downloaded as a lost sale, whereas it remains to be seen if a sale would have been made. In both cases the word 'loss' is used in ways that suggest that in some alternative universe the 'loser' would have been better off, but that is one of those things that you'll never get to check, you can only live in one universe at the time... Poor choices in retrospect are fantasy, you make your choices in real time to the best of your ability and you hope that you make them well. If you're going to second guess yourself (or be second guessed by third parties such as techchrunch) after the fact then you are engaging in deception. For all you know the whole thing could have gone south and then everybody would have have been saying 'wow, look at how much money they saved'. Hindsight...
- pyre 17y ago
  There is a difference between learning from your mistakes and 'second guessing' yourself. They should probably revisit the deal and the information that they had at the time. It's possible that there was some information they viewed as 'worthless' which would have changed their mind had they given it more weight. This could possibly help them out in similar situations in the future. Saying "we can't go second-guessing ourselves" is a sure way to keep repeating the same mistakes over and over again. _Especially_ if they are subtle mistakes with large consequences. That said, they shouldn't devote millions and millions of man-hours pouring over what they could have done different either.
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    You're absolutely right about that, and I'm sure that this is a 'learning moment' for them. I never meant to give the impression that you shouldn't learn from your mistakes. If there is a clear reason why they wanted their cash back - and nobody seems to have a clue why they did that - then all this is is speculation. Money in the bank in the short term is sometimes more important than a great payoff at some distant point in the future (if it happens).
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]

by gizmo 17y ago

jacquesm 17y ago

A 'loss' would have been if they had to write off that money instead of recoup their loan. That it would have earned them more in the long term is not a loss, that is stretching the definition of the word loss beyond the breaking point. The RIAA makes a similar argument, they count every mp3 downloaded as a lost sale, whereas it remains to be seen if a sale would have been made. In both cases the word 'loss' is used in ways that suggest that in some alternative universe the 'loser' would have been better off, but that is one of those things that you'll never get to check, you can only live in one universe at the time... Poor choices in retrospect are fantasy, you make your choices in real time to the best of your ability and you hope that you make them well. If you're going to second guess yourself (or be second guessed by third parties such as techchrunch) after the fact then you are engaging in deception. For all you know the whole thing could have gone south and then everybody would have have been saying 'wow, look at how much money they saved'. Hindsight...

pyre 17y ago
There is a difference between learning from your mistakes and 'second guessing' yourself. They should probably revisit the deal and the information that they had at the time. It's possible that there was some information they viewed as 'worthless' which would have changed their mind had they given it more weight. This could possibly help them out in similar situations in the future. Saying "we can't go second-guessing ourselves" is a sure way to keep repeating the same mistakes over and over again. _Especially_ if they are subtle mistakes with large consequences. That said, they shouldn't devote millions and millions of man-hours pouring over what they could have done different either.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  You're absolutely right about that, and I'm sure that this is a 'learning moment' for them. I never meant to give the impression that you shouldn't learn from your mistakes. If there is a clear reason why they wanted their cash back - and nobody seems to have a clue why they did that - then all this is is speculation. Money in the bank in the short term is sometimes more important than a great payoff at some distant point in the future (if it happens).
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]