,
4 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
Cramer in 2000, days before the collapse:
"throw out all of the matrices and formulas that existed before the Web....they can't make money for you anymore, and that is all that matters. If we use any of what Graham and Dodd teach us, we wouldn't have a dime under management.”
"throw out all of the matrices and formulas that existed before the Web....they can't make money for you anymore, and that is all that matters. If we use any of what Graham and Dodd teach us, we wouldn't have a dime under management.”
This is similar to "cryptonetwork valuation thinking
Null hypothesis should be that the status quo is unchanged: assets are worth discounted future cash flows
Errors with tech valuation weren't because of a lack of tools but bc of errors predicting cash flow and new biz models
Null hypothesis should be that the status quo is unchanged: assets are worth discounted future cash flows
Errors with tech valuation weren't because of a lack of tools but bc of errors predicting cash flow and new biz models
The tacit assumption is that crypto has created an entirely new paradigm -- for both asset valuation and fundraising
But my base case assumption is that other than which ONE ASSET wins as the primary money, the only way others can accrue value will be through cash flow
But my base case assumption is that other than which ONE ASSET wins as the primary money, the only way others can accrue value will be through cash flow
Questioning the almighty Lindy is a recipe for disaster
The burden of proof is on the approach that's contra lindy, not on the status quo
And there hasn't been anything that indicates yet "graham & dodd" should be jettisoned in favor of MV = PQ or xyz new valuation model
The burden of proof is on the approach that's contra lindy, not on the status quo
And there hasn't been anything that indicates yet "graham & dodd" should be jettisoned in favor of MV = PQ or xyz new valuation model
