7 ms·
There's probably quite a few people out there who would go back on a verbal agreement for $230 million.
by keypusher 11y ago
There's probably quite a few people out there who would go back on a verbal agreement for $230 million.
- gutnor 11y ago230 million out of 2.3 billion. I hope the vast majority around here would honour their word: there is nothing at all you can do with 2.3 billion that you cannot do equally with 2 billion. 230 million out of 460, 100K out of 1 million that's would be another story.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- avn2109 11y ago>> "there is nothing at all you can do with 2.3 billion that you cannot do equally with 2 billion." What about threshold effects in large scale philanthropy, where you could eradicate malaria in country X if only you could buy another three hundred million dollars worth of mosquito nets. But since you don't have the money, you only solve 95% of the problem, and then the mosquitos breed back to their original level in a few generations. (Contrived example but you get the idea)
- matwood 11y agoThe person getting the 230M isn't just some random guy on the street that a bet was made with. It is employee #1 who still works there. Presumably he was/is key to the companies success and future. Personally, I would happy to give someone 10% of my companies worth and have it be 230M because that means I have built a 2.3B company.
- gohrt 11y agoNot really true. Someone can do an incredible job taking a business from 0 to $1B, but be ineffective or worse at taking it from $1B->$2B. and that's OK --- you can thank and pay them for their past contribution, not in expectation of similar future service.
- matwood 11y agoBut the person is still there, and if he didn't get the company to 1B there would be no 1B-2B. Perhaps he was lucky and anyone could have been employee #1, good for him. People win the lottery all the time.