Hacker News Reader

This is a little aggressive. The boring company is unproven technology in a perpetually capex heavy delivery model. If I was a spacex shareholder I’d probably value it at $0 in 2018, and strongly prefer it to be not associated with spacex at all.

View on HN

Yes but on t-1 your 1% of spacex also represented 1% of boring company - which you were paying to devlop. At t+1 you owned 1% of spacex and 0% of boring company.

If you want to sell your shares for 0$ that is up to you. On the flip side, I am happy to look through your personal holdings, and anything I think is worth $0, take for myself. You wouldnt mind now would you?

Fair. I’ve worked on divesting on unprofitable unit for $0 that ended up being worth $XXM and the distraction elimination it caused for management way more than outweighed the multi year ROI on the process. But your point stands. The counter argument to your point is taken to the absurd extreme you should be like those people on TV buying entire abandoned storage lockers full of junk in the hope of finding _something_. The fact that the boring company seems to partially be working (and many people on HN would likely disagree) is rear view mirror luck. Look at Facebook and oculus now, for an analogy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com