In this thread, I'll walk you through some key concepts related to Survival, Resilience, and Aging:
- Conditional Lifetime Probabilities,
- The Force of Mortality,
- The Lindy Effect, and
- Taleb's Turkey.
(h/t @nntaleb)
2/
Suppose a restaurant, on average, stays open for 8 years before shutting down.
And suppose Bob has a restaurant -- that has been open for 3 years now.
How much longer should we expect Bob's restaurant to stay in business?
3/
We may be tempted to answer: 5 years.
After all, restaurants last 8 years on average. And Bob is already 3 years in. So, on average, he has 8 - 3 = 5 years left, right?
Not necessarily.
This 8 - 3 = 5 logic may lead us very far off the mark.
4/
Why?
Because 8 years is the average lifetime across ALL restaurants -- those that survived their first 3 years AND those that didn't.
The statistics of these two groups may be VERY different.
5/
Lots of new restaurants open their doors each year.
But the restaurant business is tough. Failure rates are high. Many new restaurants may not even survive 1 year.
Just the fact that Bob has survived 3 years in this environment may mean he's doing something right.
6/
Maybe people like Bob's food.
Or maybe Bob is unusually talented as a restaurant operator.
So, the key question to ask is: what's the average lifetime AMONG restaurants that have survived 3 years?
7/
This is a *CONDITIONAL* probability question.
We DON'T want the average lifetime across ALL restaurants. That's misleading.
We ONLY want the average of restaurants that meet a *specific* condition -- namely, surviving 3 years. That's far more representative of Bob.
8/
For this, we need to have a *model* for how restaurants tend to fail over time.
How many restaurants don't make it past Year 1, how many fail in Year 2, etc.
For example, here's one such model:
9/
According to this model:
We open a restaurant. It has a 50% chance of dying in Year 1.
IF we make it past Year 1, it has a 25% chance of dying in Year 2.
And beyond Year 2, there's a 5% chance of dying in any subsequent year.
10/
This is a simple model. But it has several useful features.
First, it's a "Markov Chain". We start at a particular "state". And each year, we move to a possibly different state -- based on the outcome of a random, coin-flip type event.
Second, this Markov Chain has exactly one "absorbing state" -- namely, death.
That is, once our restaurant dies, we stay in this dead state forever. There's no coming back from death. Because death is "absorbing".
12/
Third, our restaurant gets *harder* to kill with each surviving year: 50% chance of death in Year 1 --> 25% in Year 2 --> 5% in Years 3 and beyond.
This is called "aging in reverse".
It's the *opposite* of how humans and other living beings work for the most part.
13/
As living things get older, they usually become *more* (not *less*) prone to death.
80 year old humans are generally *more* likely to die before they turn 81, than 40 year old humans are before they turn 41.
But *restaurants* may work differently.
14/
In fact, even with humans, many societies/countries have high *infant mortality*.
That is, infants tend to be more prone to death. But past a certain age (5 years or so), this "prone-ness to death" starts decreasing. And then it picks up again in old age.
Like so:
15/
This "prone-ness to death" has another name: the Force of Mortality.
It's the probability of encountering death within a short time interval, at any given age.
The "Force of Mortality" vs "Age" graph tells us what kind of *aging* a particular system exhibits:
16/
If we apply the basics of probability to our restaurant aging model, we can calculate both the expected life of a restaurant (8 years) and the *conditional* expected life left for Bob's restaurant.
Note: The latter is NOT 8 - 3 = 5 years.
It's actually 19 years!
17/
Thus, aging in reverse is wonderful.
With each surviving year, the expected remaining life of a business that exhibits this type of aging gets longer and longer.
Such businesses tend to have "moats". Over time, competitors tend to find them harder and harder to destroy.
18/
For investors, businesses that "age in reverse" are likely to generate future cash flows that, a) last longer, and b) are more certain.
This in turn means investors can pay a bit more for such businesses, and still do reasonably well in the long run.
19/
The Lindy Effect, popularized by @nntaleb in his wonderful book "Antifragile", is a particular kind of "aging in reverse".
Here, it's not enough if expected future life just *increases* with each surviving year. It has to be *proportional* to the number of years survived.
20/
And for the mathematically inclined, here's a wonderful paper highlighting several interesting Lindy-related factoids.
For example, if a system obeys the Lindy Effect, its lifetime has to follow an 80/64 Fat Tailed Pareto Distribution.