flynnibus
Premium Member
You can't define success any way you want. Success is pretty clearly defined in capitalism. It is not happy employees. It is not a good retirement package. Those things can be a factor or contribute to profit, I agree there. But don't put the cart before the horse.
I don't define it anyway I want - but I do argue there is more than one measurement.
Can success not be measured by impact? If you were to create a cure for lukemia, but failed to maximize revenue... is your company a failure?
If your company returned maximum profits, but only lasted 3 years... is that success compared to a company that returned less profit margin, but managed to operate and return dividends for 50 years?
If your company maximized profits, but never returned any investor return because a scandal drove the stock to zero, is it success?
Which is success? $10 for one day, or $5 for 100 days?
Where I am a little shaky comprehension wise is when and exactly why profit degree changed. Profit has always been there, but the pressure to maximize seems to have evolved to an extreme. ....recently.
It came with the expansion of who can be in the market, the speed of information, the speed of trades, and expansion of the idea that wealth can be made from simply properly timed transactions rather than actual company performance. This puts all the pressure on stock price, and GROWTH rather than actual company health or performance.