Matthew Petach mpetach at
Sat Nov 28 15:56:43 UTC 2015

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Kiriki Delany <kiriki at> wrote:
> [...]
> Bottom line, is the industry needs to be increasing value, because the flip
> side.... working for no profit, surviving off investment only... there's no
> end-game. You see this cycle time and time again as market share is grabbed,
> then underperforming companies are rolled up. In this process value is
> destroyed.
> Ultimately this is also why it's extremely damaging for investors to
> constantly invest in companies that don't make a profit, and don't provide a
> successful economical model for the services/products provided. These
> companies largely live on investor money, lose money, and in their wake
> destroy value for the entire industry. Of course the end-game for the
> investors is to make money... I'm always surprised how strong
> investment/gambles are for non-profitable companies. I guess there is no end
> to those with too much money that have to place that money somewhere. As the
> rich get richer, there will only be more dumb money cheapening the value
> proposition. After all, who needs value when you have willing investors.

I'm confused.  If these companies largely live on investor money,
lose money, and destroy is it that a scant two sentences
later, the rich are getting richer, and there is _more_ dumb money?

I would posit the rich get richer because they *do*
see value in the investments they make.  That is,
value is being created in these deals...just not for


More information about the NANOG mailing list