The post you are responding to was in no way addressed to you. While I get your point that "economic and business" issues are important, my constant "thrust" is more in the direction of trying to outline and, yes, "hammer home" the fact that what the company is and has been doing can in no way, shape or form be compared to any "normal business".
And investors should recognize that: HIGH RISK, at least in the past...
One perfect example is the company's expansion into the mobile space:
Management decided to heavily invest into mobile before traction really had engaged. From a conventional business point of view this may be considered "risky", at best, and "suicidal", at worst. It certainly has "helped" creating dig's well formulated doughnut hole.
So, what possibilities did management have? Wait and not invest at that time and face the possibility that somebody else might do it... and avoid the risk of creating a doughnut hole?
Yes, I know, in the aftermath everybody has 20/20 hindsight and the dilution could maybe have been smaller... but in view of the phenomenal opportunity ahead I am not particularly worried. Actually I am excited!
In our case it's weighing "risk vs. opportunity vs. timeline" that must be considered as well. Especially considering that PC and mobile business are intrinsically linked for the future. Only the combination of both have the power to advance TC at an increasingly faster pace.
| 