Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by syngrog66 3680 days ago
fair point. I'd add that if a person has $10+ billion, already (or whatever his net worth is), then you can afford to risk blowing a few billion, here and there, on things which might turn into a loss. On the upside, he'd be better off and humanity would be better off. On the downside even if his bet failed and he and therefore the Page estate got reduced to a mere, say, $100 million in net wealth he and his children could still live out pretty good lives.

In other words, it might not have been as hard to convince him as one might think. "Gee, I can invest a big amount in a Theranos/MagicLeap/SpaceX or I can put it into the next random/fad-ish social/pic/buzz/RailsCRUD/BigData/leadgen/TODO/PM/cloud/viral/app startup. Hmmm, choices."

1 comments

Well in this case it is the company's money, and lots of people within the company are "competing" for funding of their projects. Of course there is the reverse NIH effect which is that any technology invented outside of the company seems more impressive to leadership than technology created inside the company.
great points!