Curt Doolittle

Category: Business, Organization, and Management

  • PERCEIVED RISK AND FEAR OF FAILURE Entrepreneurship in the UK and Germany feels

    PERCEIVED RISK AND FEAR OF FAILURE

    Entrepreneurship in the UK and Germany feels very much like 1000 overzealous virtue-signal conformists are trying to strangle you at all times – as if the damage they do by their virtue signaling and constraints does not somehow cause one thousand times as much damage to the people and the economy as any entrepreneurial error or fraud has any potential of doing.

    And all those poor european morons thing that by preventing someone from taking some small advantage doesn’t stifle all the advantages that are possible save the outliers.

    There is a reason the stock market and research in consumer goods are in the USA, that bond market and banking are in the London, that engineering is in Germany, and that military is in Russia.

    PERCEIVED RISK AND FEAR OF FAILURE

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-10 11:03:00 UTC

  • ( web site first. wordpress. free. search creates legitimacy. marketing on fb fi

    ( web site first. wordpress. free. search creates legitimacy. marketing on fb first just costs you a first impression, and first impressions cannot be re-made. )

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 18:17:00 UTC

  • Which Company’s Disappearance (sudden Halt Of Operations, Services, Etc.) Would Result In The Largest Impact, And What Would That Impact Be?

    THIS IS A GOOD QUESTION

    Um. I don’t think any particular company’s disappearance will have ANY material impact on the world. It’s true for example, that if we lost Google, the world would feel it rapidly and severely. Google simply supplies too many services and too many of them for free, and that would be a problem. But it’s possible to simply nationalize the service and restore it. For all intents and purposes google is now a piece of national infrastructure as important as the phone networks, and rail lines.

    If any large company that manages communications today went offline – the major carriers, the competitors would easily take over operations. If any oil company. The same. Pretty much all of them are not unique.

    I think if Microsoft disappeared overnight that would cause a lot of disruption to the world over a few years, but I think it would lead to innovation and profitability.

    I think if Apple disappeared it would trash the american stock market.

    I think that if one of the too-big-to-fail banks in the west caused a cascade failure of other too-big-to-fail banks, that would cause a catastrophe to the world, and this has been the subject of both fictional, political, economic, and even military analysis. At this point cutting a country out of the world banking system is very nearly as serious as nuclear warfare, which is what brought Russia under control in 2014.

    The biggest ‘companies’ of all are governments, and the collapse of a major G7 government would … well that would be very, very, bad.

    https://www.quora.com/Which-companys-disappearance-sudden-halt-of-operations-services-etc-would-result-in-the-largest-impact-and-what-would-that-impact-be

  • If your workplace refers to itself as a “family” be assured you work within an O

    If your workplace refers to itself as a “family” be assured you work within an Orwellian Nightmare

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-25 15:18:00 UTC

  • AMERICAN LIMITED LIABILITY MODELS c-corporation: taxes paid directly by the busi

    AMERICAN LIMITED LIABILITY MODELS

    c-corporation: taxes paid directly by the business entity, and shares and authority democratically allocated, and transfer of ownership contractually limited. (Required for public stock offerings.

    s-corporation: taxes paid by the shareholders and shares and authority democratically allocated, and transfer of ownership contractually limited.

    llc: taxes paid by the shareholders and shares and authority contractually allocated, and transfer of ownership contractually limited. Ownership by corporations or individuals. (most simple business structure)

    llp – Limited liability partnership: taxes paid by partners, and authority contractually allocated. Must have at least one managing partner with liability for actions, and all owners must be human, not corporations. (for small professional groups that have junior members, or external investors)

    Partnership – two or more people, no limited liability. Ownership non-transferrable. (stupid)

    Sole proprietorship – no limited liability. (Stupid)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-11 10:06:00 UTC

  • ideas are easy and cheap. execution is hard and expensive. and without money exe

    ideas are easy and cheap.

    execution is hard and expensive.

    and without money execution is impossible.

    and without customers money is unobtainable.

    All of us have ideas. Few of those ideas are not ‘stupid’. Few of those not-stupid ideas are novel. Few of those novel ideas are valuable to others. Few of those that are of value are valuable enough to pay for. Few of those valuable enough to pay for are economically or technologically possible. Fewer of us are industrious. Fewer of us will make the extraordinary sacrifices. And those that do try to execute with as little money as we can – usually our own, that of family, and that of friends. Few of us who can collect the money can execute well enough to survive until we have enough paying customers to profit.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-09 10:43:00 UTC

  • Every movement first attracts risk takers seeking leverage to compensate for the

    Every movement first attracts risk takers seeking leverage to compensate for their outsider-ness. As the movement evolves you try to attract people who ‘get it’ and advocate it. As the movement evolves you try to attract talent that provides competitive advantage against other movements. If the movement has legs it will attract thinkers, advocates, organizers, actors. And the need for the outsiders will decline – they fill their purpose. And they are often angry about it.

    This is how it works.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-18 13:43:00 UTC

  • The Diseconomies of Scale

    —“At what point do diseconomies of organizational scale kick in or is this a flawed frame?”—Lee Tucker That is the entire question as far as I am concerned. If we take an empirical look, the scale increases with available information systems, and the homogeneity of the population. But in simple terms, a city = a market, and a market must serve a demographic and a demographic must exploit a niche in the regional or world market. So as far as I can tell there is some ratio between population, density, iq, and homogeneity, institutiona means of distributing/collecting information necessary for decidablity, and relative productivity (purchasing power) that should tell us the optimum size. the value of scale kicked in with gunpowder and the high cost of total war. (napoleon). HOwever, with nuclear weapons, that value disappears, so as far as I can tell, 5-10M, and that is up from what looks like 2-3M in the last century, simply because of the complexity of goods and services produced, and longer lifetimes (in other words more people does not translate to more people productiely employe) . So population can increase without affecting the systems of production. Conversely, lets look at competition: a bigger city with more assets can endure shocks over longer periods of economic reorganization, by spending down those assets.

  • The Diseconomies of Scale

    —“At what point do diseconomies of organizational scale kick in or is this a flawed frame?”—Lee Tucker That is the entire question as far as I am concerned. If we take an empirical look, the scale increases with available information systems, and the homogeneity of the population. But in simple terms, a city = a market, and a market must serve a demographic and a demographic must exploit a niche in the regional or world market. So as far as I can tell there is some ratio between population, density, iq, and homogeneity, institutiona means of distributing/collecting information necessary for decidablity, and relative productivity (purchasing power) that should tell us the optimum size. the value of scale kicked in with gunpowder and the high cost of total war. (napoleon). HOwever, with nuclear weapons, that value disappears, so as far as I can tell, 5-10M, and that is up from what looks like 2-3M in the last century, simply because of the complexity of goods and services produced, and longer lifetimes (in other words more people does not translate to more people productiely employe) . So population can increase without affecting the systems of production. Conversely, lets look at competition: a bigger city with more assets can endure shocks over longer periods of economic reorganization, by spending down those assets.

  • “At what point to diseconomies of organizational scale kick in or is this a flaw

    —“At what point to diseconomies of organizational scale kick in or is this a flawed frame?”—Lee Tucker

    Curt Doolittle

    That is the entire question as far as I am concerned.

    If we take an empirical look, the scale increases with available information systems, and the homogeneity of the population.

    But in simple terms, a city = a market, and a market must serve a demographic and a demographic must exploit a niche in the regional or world market.

    So as far as I can tell there is some ratio between population, density, iq, and homogeneity, institutiona means of distributing/collecting information necessary for decidablity, and relative productivity (purchasing power) that should tell us the optimum size.

    the value of scale kicked in with gunpowder and the high cost of total war. (napoleon). HOwever, with nuclear weapons, that value disappears, so as far as I can tell, 5-10M, and that is up from what looks like 2-3M in the last century, simply because of the complexity of goods and services produced, and longer lifetimes (in other words more people does not translate to more people productiely employe) . So population can increase without affecting the systems of production.

    Conversely, lets look at competition: a bigger city with more assets can endure shocks over longer periods of economic reorganization, by spending down those assets.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-14 15:04:00 UTC