Per Bylund Profile picture
10 Mar, 18 tweets, 4 min read
If we realize the value problem, we also realize the real problem that #entrepreneurs face and must find a solution to. It's not to come up with The Idea, as is often assumed, nor the invention or the technology, but how to make something valuable to other people.
Value is the experience of satisfying a want, which means to find oneself in a better situation than before and compared to what one otherwise expected. This does not need specific inputs, but if it doesn't then there is nothing stopping us from simply satisfying it at whim.
The world's limited resources means we must try to get as valuable experiences as possible, to be as well off as we can, from what means are available to us. There is no end to how content we can imagine becoming, but the means are not enough to get us there. So we must choose.
This is why the economic problem is one of production: how to create the means for consumption, i.e. how to get better, more appropriate and effective means to satisfy our wants. Much like a PC is a better tool than a typewriter, or a car or plane better than horse-and-carriage.
The problem would be easy to solve if we could know beforehand what would satisfy the wants we have. But we don't. most of us have experience of entering a store looking for something specific, but finding something we expect will bring us much greater satisfaction--a find.
That's still only you choosing between already existing goods in a store. You did not yourself know what you wanted to buy until you laid your eyes on this new thing. If you yourself cannot predict your value assessments, how can anybody else? The simple answer is, they cannot.
Then imagine undertaking producing the goods that are in that store. Entrepreneurs started planning and investing to produce them long, perhaps years, ago. They were betting that you (and others) would find those goods sufficiently valuable to pay a price that exceeds the cost.
This takes a lot of guts. It also takes good judgment. But also, probably, luck. Past trends can be indicative of how people might act, but as in the store example entrepreneurs cannot rely on data (the past) to produce new goods. The world is not repeating but renewing itself.
Another problem that the entrepreneur must deal with, or suffer the consequences: the purchasing behavior of potential customers is relative what they are offered. High value of one good is not enough if another available good is, by the customer, expected to be more valuable.
This is why the secret sauce for entrepreneurs is not "the idea," which means little in the real world. It is the implementation of it, the actual offering to the customer, that determines whether the undertaking has actual value. It is not the thought that counts, but the sale.
Actually, it is more than the sale: the customer buys something with expectations of the good's value. The sale is based on this expectation. But if this value is not realized, there will be disappointed. This is a problem for any entrepreneur seeking to scale up or resell.
It is the entrepreneur's job to not only come up with the idea or produce the good, but to facilitate actual value: to first entice the customer, make them expect value from and so buy the product and then find satisfaction in it. Satisfaction is relative the value expectation.
Fraud, from a value perspective, means a seller of something knowingly communicates value to the intended customer that is in direct conflict with facts. It is the creation of value *expectations* in the customer's mind that the goods offering cannot meet; it creates no value.
Misleading advertising gets close to fraud for this reason: it intentionally presents a distorted view of the good in order to create an exaggerated value expectation. Since it rarely will be met, the customer will be disappointed and feel cheated.
Contrary to common perception, entrepreneurship is not about cheating, cutting corners, or making a quick buck. If the customer is not satisfied, the business will not last. This is the reason for "satisfaction guarantees" offered by many stores. They want to continue selling.
Unfortunately, many have rather severe misconceptions about entrepreneurship and markets, which all emanate from not recognizing what value is: that it is the personal experience of using a good for the purpose of satisfying a want, to become better off on one's own terms.
If we but recognize that value is in fact subjective and that it is experiential, it becomes clear what entrepreneurs do, the problem they must solve, the power of consumers, and why fraud is not a strategy for lasting business.
Check out my discussion on this topic with @hhhastings and @mdpackard on the @econ4business podcast mises.org/library/bylund…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Per Bylund

Per Bylund Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @PerBylund

19 Feb
A short thread on critical thinking. To be critical is not to be contrarian, opposed, or anti--it's to be open for the possibility that you might have gotten it wrong. So, the more time/effort you've spend thinking critically about something, the more errors you'd have discarded.
That's where an 'expert' should be: they have, ideally, spent a lot of time studying some phenomenon and know a lot about it. So they would have already discarded plenty of false explanations. Unfortunately, getting an advanced degree doesn't automatically provide such expertise.
In other words: you should not accept someone's authority on a subject because of their titles/degrees. So, when I say something about the economy (my expertise), you should, if you disagree, push back, ask penetrating questions. It's likely that one of us got something wrong.
Read 9 tweets
25 Jan
The problem with #politics is that it exaggerates and makes (empty) slogans out of what we know. This applies to the #minimumwage too, where proponents of increasing it claim it will raise people's wages and opponents claim it will kill jobs. Neither is very accurate or finds
support in economic theory. Let's look at what a minimum wage law does, and then at what we can expect from it. Because the former is rarely admitted and the latter goes both ways. So, first, a minimum wage law is not an increase in anybody's wage, it is only a prohibition of
paying employees less than a stated amount. Raising the minimum wage law does not mean whoever is making less gets an automatic raise. What it does mean, especially after a transition period, is that there will be no jobs that create less value than is necessary for employers to
Read 21 tweets
10 Jan
The problem with (and for) #SiliconValley is their lack of #entrepreneurship. Yes, really: they're bad at being entrepreneurs, at providing the entrepreneurial function in the economy. To put it differently, they are technology driven in their profit-seeking but not consumer
driven. The difference is monumental both for the economy and the companies, and this is why they're failing. No, failing doesn't mean they are necessarily losing money, but that their profits are short-term and that they are undermining their own market positions. The business
they are in is not sustainable. This goes way beyond the selling of eyeballs, which is the focus of Facebook, Twitter, Google, and others. As it's often said, if you are not the paying for the product you *are* the product. Facebook is selling you, and your future purchases, to
Read 20 tweets
9 Jan
Twitter is obviously purging again...
-100 followers since last night. Keeps dropping.
Read 6 tweets
30 Dec 20
Sadly, the @AOMConnect #AMR editors continue the all-too-common mistake of conflating Coase and Williamson and even cite Coase as source of TCE. But they're not the same, or even commensurable, as I show in my forthcoming SMR paper (linked in next tweet). journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/am…
Bylund (2021). "The firm vs. the market: Dehomogenizing the transaction cost theories of Coase and Williamson." Strategic Management Review Vol. 2, No. 1. leeds-faculty.colorado.edu/jere1232/smr.h…
Here's the error. The #AMR editors even note opportunism alongside the citation of Coase (1937), a concept Coase vehemently opposed. 🤦‍♂️ Image
Read 5 tweets
20 Dec 20
Many anti-market folks assert that property must have arisen from someone claiming for himself that which was jointly used. That's their bias, not an explanation or theory. Private property can emerge from joint or communal use without conflict. When it does, it is by definition
legitimate property. Locke showed how it could be done through mixing one's labor with unowned/unclaimed land. I have previously drafted an alternative theory. Neither claims that all existing property, or even the existing property *system*, is therefore libertarianpapers.org/5-man-matter-f…
legitimate, only that there can be legitimate private property. This is enough to carefully consider the concept, which must be accepted as a potential alternative solution for social production and economy. The arguments for property-based production are very strong, which is,
Read 13 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!