Good Companies Should Not Last Forever.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 вер 2024
- Sign up to Morning Brew for a totally free selection of high quality business, finance and general interest articles delivered direct to your inbox every morning - morningbrewdai...
Sign up for my newsletter compoundeddail... 👈
------
A going concern is a business term used by accountants to describe a business that has the resources to continue making enough money to stay afloat for the foreseeable future.
This assumption is useful for accounting practices, but it could be overrated in the field of investing.
We tend to think that successful companies will be around for a really long time and certainly some companies like this do exist, Johnson and Johnson, General Electric and Coca Cola have all been in business for over 100 years trading as the same company they are today.
Even older companies exist if you follow the history of business mergers back to their beginning, JP Morgan Chase is the modern product of several bank mergers over three different centuries with the first constituent bank tracing it’s roots back to 1799.
Having early investments in any of these companies would make you a very rich person today, but you would also be a very dead person too, which reduces the appeal of this investing strategy considerably.
A recent industry report has found that one of the biggest mistakes that investors make is overvaluing the longevity of a company and its easy to see why with people like warren buffet talking frequently about how much $5 invested into coca cola would be worth today.
So it’s time to learn How Money Works to find out why businesses that last hundreds of years are not always the amazing investment they seem.
-----
#business #investing #finance
Edited By: Andrew Gonzales
Music Courtesy of: Epidemic Sound
Select Footage Courtesy of: Getty Images
For sponsorship inquiries, please contact sponsors@worksmedia.group
Sign up to Morning Brew for a totally free selection of high quality business, finance and general interest articles delivered direct to your inbox every morning - morningbrewdaily.com/howmoneyworks
Lol I’m probably your first like after you 😅
Merck executives will panic after seeing this video
For SPY, or the U.S. market, we have to pay time even if we don't want to pay efforts and stresses.
Buffet, who is a value investor and does not care about the stock prices, can beat the SPY.
I might not be an investor like him, but I can keep the money safe.
Not to believe how much I like this video because everyone puts buufet on pedestal like it's fucking a god
The "hot hand fallacy" only really applies in business when considering profits. When considering longevity it is actually totally reasonable to expect an old company to outlast a young one. This is because of the sort of people who will be drawn to work for an old established company versus a "young dynamic" company. The former will inevitably be far more risk averse. This might well lead to a slow decline but is unlikely to see the sort of decision that might ruin the company next year. In short we expect to see less volatility in old companies.
Plus, If a company survives for a long time, the chances that it has some characteristics that contribute to such longevity is high, compared to a new startup
Yeah, that was my one criticism about the title of this video and mentioning such a fallacy. What if the owners don't care about massive profits and just want to offer a consistent product/service? No, that might not be a company worth investing in, but it has value and merit and deserves to still exist. It's admirable, sounds like the people there (usually family-run) are just doing what they enjoy and saying screw it to the rat race. I can appreciate that.
It's called Lindy Effect: the longer a period something has survived to exist or be used in the present, the longer its remaining life expectancy.
The idea of "hot hand fallacy" is itself very reductive, falling to an even bigger fallacy that I just call the fundamental statistical fallacy. Maybe you will discredit me because I don't have a history of making correct summaries like this :^)
Basically it's the human tendency to go for statistics, and ASSUME that there's not REAL statistical gradient, that CORRECT way to bet 90/10 is to the chance of the 90. But that is not how statistics work, that is how DETERMINISM works, acting like you GET to try and try again until YOU get it right most of the time. In reality, if you fall into the 10, it is GUARANTEED to fail the 90, because it's NOT 100/0, it's not 80/20, it's THAT outcome.
In practice, if a player makes three hoops in a row, the likelyhood is that TODAY is their day, they're on top of their game, there's low wind or noise, anything, but you're dealing with REAL WORLD EXCEPTION and NOW is the MOMENT to bet. If you have a leukemia with 99/1 chance, guess what you don't BET on not having leukemia, you DO HAVE leukemia. And giant, long-standing corporations are not enterpreneurships, that follow the "rules" of idealized economics texts. They WRITE them and they get to break them.
@@BewareTheLilyOfTheValley THose people already won the rat race, tho. A successful family business will last you for generations. You don't need to be the top dog to actually win the race, tbh
The book "Scale: The Universal Laws of Growth, Innovation, Sustainability, and the Pace of Life in Organisms, Cities, Economies, and Companies" goes (as well) over the point of longevity of companies. An incredibly interestin read!
I am going to have to check that out, thank you for the suggestion.
@@HowMoneyWorks One of those life (/perspective) changer books for me. YOU reading this comment, go read that book!
Scale was written by Geoffrey West. He is a British physicist who works with the Santa Fe Institute.
Oh wow I nearly ran out of breath while reading the title! Definitely gonna check it out tho, sounds good from the title lol
@@SlabtheKiller89
I read 📚 your comment too! Now off you go to celebrate 🍾. 😶
The zeroth law of any organization seems to be to maintain its own existence whether it is doing anything useful or not.
Exactly, applies universally to absolutely everything humans do
It’s the law, companies have to act in the interest of their shareholders
Every organism exists primarily to maintain itself
This is just an obvious consequence of the senior people not wanting to be unemployed with a bankruptcy on their CV. There is no organization, only people.
With corporations that have no real checks or balances whatsoever I don't think they should be allowed to exist on such a scale.
You also have to remember what industry certain older companies specialize in. An older company like Hershey isn't going to be a high flying stock like Microsoft or Amazon but it's a leader in its specialty (chocolate). The other way they may survive is by either creating new products or by buying other existing companies in their niche. In this case Hershey bought out Wrigley (the gum company). Mondelez is a spinoff of the Kraft foods division which bought Nabisco from RJ Reynolds, the tobacco company. Kraft made some money from Nabisco but decided to focus on their cheese and condiments business while creating Mondelez to focus exclusively on snacks. Meanwhile, Church and Dwight has been around for over 150 years selling their signature brand Arm and Hammer.
Interesting that several of these older companies produce food, personal hygiene and cleaning products.
@@devinmcmanus specialised, yet generally needed things aren't gonna disappear over night.
Brooms gonna remain brooms, there's little need to reinvent.
Even if you reach absurd levels of modernty, a hammer will still be an invaluable tool regardless of if you're fixing a barn or a whole darn robot.
The fact people keep calling it Facebook despite the change to Meta shows how bad of a marketing decision it was. The name became so ingrained in society they thought they could just change it on a whim.
I think it's the same as alphabet renaming their company, people still call alphabet: "Alphabet, the parent company of google"
@@diskyariajetmiko wait alphabet is not their name anymore?
@@superchargedpetrolhead it trades as GOOGL now, which I guess is what they're refering to
@@BastiatC oh okay
@@Ushio01 that may be the case but the OPs point still stands. Most people know the company as Facebook not meta
Facebook pissed every content creator off when they stopped showing business pages to every fan who liked it and required paid ads instead to show it to anyone.
Reminds me a little of the gaming industry and it's seemingly endless need for growth. It's been a well growing industry for a while, but it feels like investors expect there to be infinite people willing to jump into games when there's obviously not.
Rather than improving existing products they're always looking to draw a wider net which has led to worse and worse experiences for many of them.
Or I could have entirely misunderstood this video and they're not alike at all. Just feels like similar situations in a broad sense.
Less about casting a wider net, but more staying on the tail of the newest trend and squeezing the ever loving fuck out of it with Microtransactions before then rushing it out half-baked.
games take a handsome development time depending on the type, but still are quicker to develop than say, a car.
It falls under tech, and tech is just idea stealing, hype chasing and the one innovation that causes the former two.
I wish gaming wasn't regarded as just another money pot by those money sacks...
@@justascarecrow6988it’s not all grim thanks to Indie Devs. There are People out there who know to follow the fun rather than the money
@@Gearsio Many of which don't get the recognition they deserve.
Among a sea of them, it's hard to find the gems, unless the whole internet is singing their praises, i guess.
The biggest failure for Instagram are its horrible search feature, terrible commenting tools, and rampant bots. Other then that, it’s actually a great social media platform, but I think those three items hinder it’s growth. Also, TikTok is doing it better.
Family-run businesses make this even more complicated. Such a businesses are rarely successful over multiple generations for a variety of reasons. There are exceptions to this though. If the family members are successful on their own and don't have much interest in the business they can be absent owners choosing instead to have someone or another entity run the business ( my father is in the process of doing this with his business as neither I nor my sister has any interest in the 40-year-old company).
The swedish Riksbanken shown as one of the oldest companies isn't a company but Sweden's central bank. A gouvernment agency. Same can be said for the norwegian postal service for much of it's history.
Most of the biggest banks are many centuries old.
I feel like it would be better (ie in an ideal world) if companies as they start to reach their growth threshold, start working on optimizing what they do, cutting administrative bloat, and finally work on buying back stock from investors to take the company private. I can see where a worker directed enterprise would have the incentive to do this, while the standard executive model has more incentive to try to keep “Frankenstein’s monster” per say, running until it’s last breath. Realistically though, it makes sense that businesses will reach a growth limit. A business however not growing shouldn’t necessarily be considered a bad thing (especially if it’s revenue is net positive)
The true is that it is better to go for traditional business. Innovative one tend to go bust thus no safety for family in future.
Better for what? Better for security. True. Better for getting rich quick. False. It all depends on your tolerance for volatility.
the average company should not last forever. exceptionally good ones should. same deal with individual people. this however is an ideal, not something immediately practical.
The secret to wealth is simple: Find a way to do more for others than anyone else does. Become more valuable. Do more. Give more. Be more. Serve more
You're right
You see many people remain poor because of ignorance
@James Waster
You're not the only one that trade with Expert HATTIE LILLIAN SLOAN services my whole family does trade with him and Even my friends and neighbors here in Oakland California
Wooow this woman, expert HATTIE LILLIAN her good work has been everywhere. Been seeing a lot of good comments about her in several places. I feel more confident investing with her.
I have heard a lot about investments with Expert Hattie Lillian Sloan and how good she is, please how safe are the profits?
I see this problem a lot. Producers in a company are outnumbered by non-producers
The free throw example is one of the few wrong examples of the hot hand fallacy. Human performance is correlated to immediately preceding performance, due to immediately preceding performance indicating a greater likelihood of favorable physiological and psychological conditions presently at play.
Sveriges Riksbank are the Swedish equivalent of FED. And Posten Norge are owned by the Norwegian government. And has a long history of monopoly over the distribution of letters and packages. So... Probably not the best example of "European family bussiness"
However great video, but please for future videos check your sources to avoid misleading information
I was about to get pretty upset that you didn’t include Richard Thaler and Selena Gomez’s scene in the big short, but seeing you include that warmed my heart
...for everybody to keep on learning how money work.
'Hot hand fallacy' learned something new today.
Read “Standard Deviations” by Gary Smith for learning those kinds of fallacies and biases.
Free throws mentioned in the video are a good example. People like Nate Silver (who know both sports and statistics) are usually careful with examples like shooting from the field as things such as favourable defensive match ups can lead to a player shooting above average, rather than it being a statically anomaly.
Nate's book "The signal and the noise" is a great read on the topic.
You never saw The Big Short?
I feel like there are some services where it would be extremely beneficial to the customers for them to not have to worry about it going away but maybe those kinds of services should be public instead
I think this is misleading because if a basketball player is continually making free throws this could be an indication that he is good at making free throws thus making it more likely he will make the next one than a random player with unknown skill will make a free throw
04:12 that’s completely untrue. Theres a steady decline in the number of businesses failure from year 4 to every year after. I just looked up papers that did this research on google scholar. By Alexander Kucher in the journal “Review of Managerial Science”.
Your over applying hot hand fallacy to something that it doesn’t cover. The reason advertisers want the 18-34 demographic is because people get accustomed to a brand and product early in their life and stay with it. Beyond that there is just a human significance put on an establishment that went through history it has a story to tell. That’s why the engineering firm bought the oldest company.
Poor Kmart & toys'R'us . they made me happy as a kid
I strongly disagree that a company's history means absolutely nothing when trying to predict its future success. Companies are run by people, and a long track record of financial success indicates that a business has a legacy of hiring the right leadership and making wise decisions. That's not a guarantee that this will continue, but it's valid evidence, and the more evidence, the better. A company with no track record has no proof that they can sustain their initial success, and is therefore riskier to trust. Perception of trust matters.
I really need to watch all your videos
WOW your channel is awesome. went through 5 videos so far and now questioning my channel lol
Great video. you've remind me of what someone once said❤ Making money is an Action, keeping money is behavior, Growing money is Knowledge. I once attended seminar and ever since then i been waxing strong financially, and i most tell you the truth
People prefer to spend money on liabilities,Rather than investing in assets and be very profitable.
You're so correct! Save, invest and spend for necessities and a few luxuries relatives to on's total assets ratio.
@@johnnyrodney8186 I'm just shocked you mentioned Expert Lauren James thought am the only one trading with her
@@annasparo6717 Haha you don't have to be surprised Mrs Lauren is really good and everyone loves genuine services,she helped me recover what I lost trying to trade on my own.
Actually I trade cry ptØ currency on her broker with assistance from there top cry ptő analysts Mrs Lauren she's my professional assistant. I have been under her for 2 years now.... I've really made alot trading from her strategies in Crypto currencᎥes this period.
How does one invest in Warren Buffett?
To invest in Warren Buffett you'd buy Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.B). However, Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway has underperformed the S&P 500 for a decade and is getting toward the end of his life (92 years old).
Buy Berkshire Hathaway
@@2011blueman the joke was that Warren Buffett lasts forever
@@CaseyBurnsInvesting If you have to explain your "joke", it's not a joke.
The “hot hand fallacy” itself turned out to be a myth. It is a real phenomena in basketball. Researchers simply weren’t accounting for defenders adjusting their defense against the player with the hot hand. When this was re-examined, the hot hand turned out to be real.
What about TATA
I would hardly call Apple or Microsoft companies that started a short time ago. If you can hire someone younger than the company, you no longer qualify as having a recent start.
also, good people do not live forever.
eventually the ceo/head gets replaced by someone who doesn't exactly share the same vision, and definitely someone who didn't go through building the company.
Wait, you forgot the biggest old companies of all. Banks. Look at European, especially British banks. Barclays is many centuries old and is one of the world's largest banks. Many of the world's largest banks are many centuries old. In fact, old banks are trusted more and are instrumental and influential in financial laws and regulations which means they're the only ones to survive and be big enough in Europe.
@How Money Works: You excused for your pronounciation of Kongo Gumi, but not for your pronounciation of Bayer at 8:26 :(
Thanks for this VERY useful advice my good man. I'll keep it close to my heart in my own future endeavors. Keep up the good work.
Did you even watch the video? What advice did you glean and how will you use it?
@@AlcoholicBoredom plenty my dude.
Exactly what I was thinking about a video I watched on Company Man on KFC...
I unable to understand... 😭
These businesses mentioned got nothing on prostitution, don’t @ me…
😂🤣
I'm SO ADDICTED to this channel!
Great video!
They arent the same companies. Different products, processes, systems, etc. The brand is what survives not the business.
South Korean companies have been able to survive lotte, samusung etc...
Who are you more likely to trust your child with, a charity work who decided his life to save children or an insane drug addict who will do anything for his next fix? By this logic history has nothing to do with it, but that is completely nonsensical. Past history shouldn’t be your only evaluation, but it shouldn’t be completely dismissed.
yeah all business should just liquidate or stop expanding when growth seems unlikely
Love your content
Please consider hiring a VO artist / a better one
"34 people online" xD
While we wait for a corrupt company to fold workers suffer. That’s why we need laws protecting citizens in the workplace
All corporations used to be temporary until they were given legal personhood.
Except Nintendo
Ok, but about the state-owned companies? 🤔
Basically avoid glamour stocks/blue chips and focus on growing small companies.
The free throws analogy is flawed. While true in the purely statistical sense of the word, in a practical game past performance is very much a statistically significant indication of future performance. People do have hot streaks and good games for reasons rooted in psychology and neurology, it's not a statistically pure experiment with fixed probability distributions.
😂😂 at the 8:47 mark. Angry boomer convention??? Well damn 😂
"Wirecard startet and operated as a legit business". No, the beginning was shady and all the rest as well.
No company should be too big to fail as well.
Metaverse should have been started as an independent project and after it catches on then incorporated into Facebook
Always funny what's considered old in America, in Europe there are bars and restaurants that have been around for 300 years
love this video
Out of paper? Better call Dunder Mifflin.
Have you heard of the book “Bullshit Jobs”?
Yeah a lot of older companies are going bankrupt like flies...
But they never fail though
Damn, i thought Bayer's worst historical baggage was the Holocaust stuff...
Ug so annoying to be paying for ad free UA-cam subscription and still gave to hear stupid ads embedded in the video 😤🤮
Mark himself must’ve paid for this cop-out ass video 😂
You're Japanese pronunciation wasn't bad. Japanese pronunciation is pretty easy. Slight clumsy accent, but totally understandable.
Facebook should scrap meta and focus on hosting real face to face events. Esp post COVID everyone wants to be out. Plus people will post what they're doing
No, GOOD companies should last forever but no company that gets that big, got there by being fair to their employees and giving good deals to their customers. Not to mention the never ending greed that stems from the joke of an economy that is essentially the stock market. Instead of just being happy with profits, its always about more growth, more more more.
Thanks for watching send a direct msg for more profitable information 👆👆
Wow this opened my eyes lol
If you would have invested all of your money into Facebook when this video came out you would have doubled your money today
Probably triple now 😂
The content is good but the constant clips from movies and TV shows is extremely annoying.
It's called the Good Old Boys club.
Note to self: don’t name your company after your (first) product
Samsung downturn anyone?
This is a perfect video that unintentionally is an excellent example why investors are bad for the economy. Investors are already rich people using gimmicks to get richer without actually producing anything themselves. This is unsustainable for a nation long term, and nations are long term. Thus investing should be heavily restricted and regulated, while private company ownership should be havely supported. In Europe and Asia there are companies that are over 700 years old and still owned by the same family, still profitable because the focus is on quality not global domination.
The start of the video is a perfect example how investors ruined one such company in Japan. This is a complex topic but recessions and depressions are not intrinsic to economies, they are created by greed and ignorance through monopolizing industries. It's much harder to have a recession or depression in a truly capitalistic nation where there are hundreds of smaller companies in any industry, instead of a handful of Titanics controlling everything. When the monopolic Titanic goes down, the entire economy goes down with it. But when you have thousands of smaller ships, when one goes down, hardly a dent it makes. A world run by investors, which is code for monopoly, is destined for catastrophe.
I've never loved a comment more. Framing this.
Hey, don’t forget free money and super low interest rates fueling investment craziness. I think this comment only scratches the surface on how mal-investments become the norm when a speculative economy and bad policies allow it.
Doesn't the part about Carl Icahn and the ACF in the vid exactly disprove your point.
Watching this as Disney is imploding. But they're failing because they decided to go ultra woke, not something that fits into the traditional business model.
Amazing video and thank you for breaking it down!! Despite the economic downturn, I'm so happy 😊I have been earning $ 60,000 returns from my $7,000 investment every 12days.
That's awesome. I dealt with crypto last year on Robinhood, tried some index but didn't take it out so I lost it by the end. Any consistent strategies?
@Jaclyn Hinojosa When I glance through your comments, I know you must be talking about Mrs Benito. It's been 3 months of steady crypto growth using her trading strategy.
Trading with Benito's strategy is nothing new to me, I opened a trading at $5K, and I've been able to scale to $18K in two weeks.
@Richie Gordon Amazing!!! found Mrs Benito Revilla 2 months ago here also!!! This is so validating hearing you also got her recommendations!!! Yes cheers to be part of her coaching program.
Benito's concept is key in beating all odds to excel in this form of online commodity. Her management team is quite impressive so far! With $4k I made a profit of over 28,863 dollar
8:40 Germany Car companies 1933-1945 (Jewish Slaves)
Subscribe to how history what? I didn't know about this channel!
Or,and hear me out: let them all dye,killit if u hav too,bruh,actually...
"Naw.... we should steal money from the people that need it most and give it to the businesses that deserve it the least." ~Most voters.
It's not a joke... it's a fact. And every election, regardless of which party wins... that is the result. You either change how you vote or stop whining.
meta will never become the next myspace. they need to start some sort of political propaganda to push the longevity of meta just the way companies like pepsi and coca cola are doing but funding magazines to promote AAA size modelling and calling obesity beautiful.
I preferred it when the hot hand fallacy was explained by a cute girl
Wow, this video speaks VOLUMES about alot of companies in the current day/year/several years. Also what Carl Icahn did sounds like what ELON Musk is doing with Twitter right now in fact. Anyway, their is a reason we have _SEVERAL_ variations of the phrase "all good things much come to an end". Sometimes its just time to cash in your chips or cash out and look for opportunity else where.
ALSO, the living meme of Mark Zuckerburg and his Metaverse is LOSSING the battle vs VRchat and other services will never stop being funny! So many videos have been made on how the Metaverse is just unessasary, is desperate to find users (to the point employees are supposedly forced to use it, and even then they WONT), and its SO EXPENSIVE to get into that its like "why would i EVER use this?".
I cannot stomach your videos to many promotions
One of oldest publicly traded companies in the world is The Hudson's Bay Company (AKA the Bay). They once defacto owned most of North America. Today they do okay as a department store and still hold a lot of land, but yeah a far cry from its height.
Hudson's Bay Company isn't publicly traded.
A bit like the Dutch East Indies company.
@@FutureCommentary1 some guy on his way to defraud whole nations: 🗿
'Get in, get rich, get out' seems to be true for both price fighters & the largest companies in the world on a long enough timeline.
It's more like "Get in, get rich, control the government, print infinite money"
thats why i love meta, its killing itself, its a gold star for the ZUCC
going the way out like MySpace and many other social media sites! it's a pattern!
meta will never be oasis in ready layer one
It really isn't though it's just reinvesting its massive profits rather than give it to shareholders.
@@spicychad55 MySpace lasted less than 2 years before Murdoch bought it and it basically suffered its first death when Murdoch sold it for $35 million in 2011 when MySpace was 8 years old.
😂😂😂😂
The reason people like old companies isn't because they are old companies, it's because people like to invest in companies that are proven to have a secure economic and competitive advantage within their industry, and a tell-tale sign of such companies is their ability to generate profits year after year despite competition. The fact that they have inefficiencies means they have even more room for growth.
Can you please explain how inefficiency shows existence of the room for growth? And inefficiency in what and growth of what? Thanks
@@trappart9209 The better the systems, the better the results (profits). Calling something an inefficient system implies a more efficient system exists. The issue is most companies that get "too big to fail" become too arrogant to accept their flaws.
Meta's PR strategy has been a major flop. Had Meta followed better systems, it wouldn't have been. Imagine where they would be if they had positive PR rather than negative PR. That's one huge area with room for growth.
@@SquidShield Is it possible that the metaverse is something that consumers don't want?
@@devinmcmanus no. The existing successful products like second life and imvu demonstrate that the product is something that is viable. Facebook should have had a big advantage since it can use Facebook to encourage it's use, as it does with its marketplace, video calling and messaging services, meta failed because it's implementation was severely lacking.
@@BastiatC the issue is IMVU and Secondlife let you do mostly whatever you want and are already established with abilities for content creators to get paid. Metaverse would be nothing like that at all.
Great Video, and thanks for the shout out!
I wish that more people knew/remembered that originally corps were intended to have a limited life intended to complete a project ot set of projects, then gracefully die off again.
Send me informations about it, cause it sound like something that could be true, and for sure would be good in most brands, cause a lot of companies are literally selling us stuff we don’t need and cause of that we are waisting those precious resources for nothing.
I think you're underselling longevity. Sure just shopping around for companies with _past_ longevity isn't going to be a great way to earn big bucks. But if I knew ahead of time if a company would last 30 + years from now without diluting its stock by issuing more to raise money (in other words if I knew _future_ longevity) I'd probably be rich in a decade even if that meant I got a few Kongo Gumis and missed out on a Facebook now and then. Granted, most outsiders (and probably most insiders) don't know the future longevity of their own company. But it's not a bad thing, it's just that past results are no guarantees of future returns. By the way, a good foul shooter is more likely to be on a 15 successful shooting streak than a bad foul shooter, so the streak for sports players, while probably overrated by fans, actually gives more information than streaks in stock prices.
That japanese company must have immense cultural significance. I think you missed the part where it could be a marketing move, and of course, just a wish to not see that company die.
Exactly, they even buy because sheer amount of respect
Its okay.
We all Want Facebook Meta to fail too!
I think the problem is that these days big companies have a TON of patents and IPs that makes it hard for them to fall or for their work to be iterated as no one would let them expire. Disney is one thing, but there's also how software, code, and designs can be registered and restricted -- see how video games cannot iterate on ways to circumvent loading time tedium due to old patents.
meh... that isn't a good example / the real issue for most big companies to stay around just comes down to a barrier to entry for new competition... eventually over time its normal for a successful company to buy out a competitor if they want to leave the market... the companies that have a hard time doing this are more or less publicly traded companies as they are visible
but there are industries that have private companies that have been around a long time... say industrial equipment -- HVAC and the like
the cost to compete efficiently in those areas requires a lot of capital but that capital is hard to gain interest when its already an old industry because over time there are few advancements that can be made for improving how to move air..... this is why tech companies are considered worth more for investment due to the fact that tech is constantly changing
Patents can and do expire...
It boggles my mind just how stupid Facebook is by betting so heavily on the metaverse. The best explanation I can think of is that they think they can will it into relevance by using their sheer size.
I invest in META because I enjoy burning money
I'm down 20k so far. Knowing mr. Cuckenberg's personall loss is in billions and he wont bail out, i think i will hold, all while giggling uncontrollably.
Lol are you seriously suggesting that shot history, whether a player is warmed up, focussed, in the zone, flowing, hitting every hoop is completely irrelevant to whether you'd bet on them making the next shot? You don't know humans very well, if so.
You’re showing everyone your stupidity