There’s a famous NFL quote from a former general manager of the Arizona Cardinals that goes, “If Hannibal Lecter ran a 4.3 (40-yard dash) we'd probably diagnose it as an eating disorder.”
I'll argue in this day and age, that any founder/C-level person who has "created" billions in value, no matter how much of a paper tiger it is, will almost always get another shot. If SBF or Elizabeth Holmes weren't physically in prison, I bet they'd be able to get investment for whatever their next idea is.
The point of comparison in the analogy is "founder/C-level person who has "created" billions in value, no matter how much of a paper tiger it is."
The claim is that investors are interested in executives who they perceive to have created billions in value, and that's analogous to how NFL teams are interested in people who run fast.
Investors are not interested in executives that “create” billions, they are interested in investors that create billions.
NFL teams are interested in players that can actually run fast, not players that can say they do, but are found to be lying and it turns out they cannot run fast causing the team to lose.
> Investors are not interested in executives that “create” billions, they are interested in investors that create billions.
Investors are interested in people they can use to make money. The latter are easier to use, but the former will suffice. It just depends on when you sell.
Now? Yes for Kenneth Lay (assuming he was still alive and/or not hiding on a desert island under a new identity if I put on my tin foil hat)... Madoff, probably not.
Why a yes for Kenneth Lay? Do you think the experience of running a scam is transferable to a real business? Or do you not consider enron a scam? Or do you think the line between scams and businesses is so blurred that the skill doing them is the same?
Adam Neumann is not a good example. While he has proven good at raising money he has not been proven at running a business or even finding successful ones. My comment was exactly about that difference.
> You misunderstand how these corporate situations work. He will fall upward to a better job someplace else if he chooses.
I have no doubt that Altman is deeply embedded in the techbro good old boys network to get another job, but that doesn't change the fact his (now previous) employer released a blog post saying he LIED TO THE BOARD about something severe enough that they had to insta-sack him.
No clear transition plan. In what situations world a board fire the ceo from the worlds greatest tech sensation since who knows when, in a matter of hours ?
Are you seriously comparing OpenAI to WeWork? I'm not particularly bullish on AI but you have to give OpenAI credit for what they've accomplished under Altman.
You misunderstand how these corporate situations work. He will fall upward to a better job someplace else if he chooses.
Adam Neumann, who started then destroyed WeWork, already raised $350 million from Andreessen Horowitz for another real estate company called Flow.