This article is basically the same story, but more detailed and better-written: https://thehustle.co/gerald-ratners-billion-dollar-speech
OK, we'll change to that from https://www.businessblogshub.com/2012/09/the-man-who-destroy.... Thanks!
A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)
81–90 of 499 posts
Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, the best "public shaming" talk I've seen are the ones given by Monica Lewinsky. When you consider that Monica Lewinsky was 22 years old during the time of the scandal, a lot of the stuff going on was simply outside of her control. Seeing things from her perspective is pretty interesting, to say the least: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yq7Eh6JTKIg John Oliver starts the discussion, but there is a Lewinsky…
I never understood why Lewinsky got ridiculed that much. If anything she was a victim in the whole thing. Or am I missing something?
The political machine had an interest in smearing her. Democrats could never let her be seen as a victim, because if she's a victim Bill Clinton is a predator. Meanwhile, some of the right wing media-started mocking her as not what you'd expect the leader of the free world to get with, if for no better reason than it makes for better TV than lecturing about family values.
Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)
#83I would say this is not the Ratner effect but the Othello effect (as in Reversi not Shakespeare) Ratner merely put down the last piece that flipped almost the whole board. Marketing is usually the uphill struggle to persuade anyone looking at the board that "white is winning" when it is really anyone's game. But eventually one piece is played, often a public failure, and everyone realises the board was destined to be…
That board didn't have to flip. Ratner could have just kept selling the brand instead of stating his true opinions to a media circus. And the brand would have retained its value, perhaps all the way to today if he could have kept the unit economics alive. What made the brand successful wasn't what Ratner thought it was. The word at hand here is 'hubris'. Successful people slowly lose touch with the rest of the world…
No eventually it would flip - it happens all the time. It's just this time the boss of the company laid down the final
piece so it sticks in the mind
Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)
#84[deleted]
Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whenever there is a huge power mismatch in a relationship - that is generally not a situation where you can't say someone is not coerced in any way. Especially when the person in question is the president of the United States!
Why not? Women are naturally attracted to men in power, others seek career advantages over coworkers through sex with their superiors.
That’s why in most companies it’s absolutely verboten for a manager to have any kind of romantic/sexual relationship with subordinates. This should apply to the president too. Having sex with an intern is just shameful and shows serious character issues.
Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're more curious about this story. I highly recommend slate's slow burn on the Clinton Scandal. https://slate.com/slow-burn Impeccable journalism and incredible interviews are given.
I'm sorry to be pedantic, but I'm confused by what seemed to be a recommendation to read this link because it's going to be awesome, but then you say "incredible interviews." I'd feel a lot better if you clarified, before I read, "incredible" as in "extraordinary" or "difficult to believe."
I'm having trouble deciding whether or not you are being serious. Yes, technically, the word "incredible" originally meant "not credible." However, in common usage, it simply means, "very good."
Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)
#87What I don't understand, is how it wasn't immediately apparent this stuff was junk? You couldn't possibly think that it was equal in quality to much more expensive competitors. I guess it's just the case of not being real, until someone says it.
My understanding with such apparent truths is that even if its noticeable to an individual its a question of his personal opinion vs prevailing wisdom. so in his mind he runs a quick calculus on the cost of changing other peoples prevailing opinion and possibly alienating them of just giving in and buying the damn thing. Now when it is said out loud by somebody with enough critical weight then that calculation shifts dramatically & it may be worthwhile speaking up again. once that opinion is out there you can move that conclusion out into your model of the world instead of keeping it in your personal model so essentially you are unburdened from having to keep that mental context alive within you and you can more easily move on to the next step from there.
IMHO this is how diamonds have proliferated for so long despite having minimal intrinsic value.
Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course, everyone who bought it already knew it was crap. It's the same thing for buying $15K engagement rings. Everyone knows it's a stupid use of money and that the rings have no value. Same goes for clothing, cars, and many other things. These types of products succeed because of a shared delusion. Take fashion for instance. Everyone believes some clothes are more fashionable than others. The way you dress says…
That's a far leap from engagement ring cost being the result of society sharing a delusion and believing there is a delusion with some clothes being more fashionable than others. Psychology has a definition named the halo effect and it's very real. A person definitely gains advantages in society when they appear more attractive than less attractive. Naturally people associate good health with attractiveness and it's…
I absolutely agree with some clothing is used for health/sexual/wealth signaling and it works to some degree. But these simple ideas don't nearly explain fashion. If fashion didn't include a huge amount of delusion, it would converge. It wouldn't shift with each generation.
We are more than hardwired to find the most capable mate. We're also hardwired to pick up social cues so if a large enough group of people believe something, we believe it too. If everyone you knew started wearing those MC Hammer pants tomorrow, how long would you hold out? If people suddenly and entirely stopped wearing ties with suits, would continue to wear the most unnecessary accessory ever? Why does everyone in tech dress so similarly?
Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
seems like a bug in humans, since the material reality underlying those statements is the same.
The connotation is a lot different even if the reality can converge. A mass market pen I pickup in an office supply store can probably be reasonably described as affordable and good value. It's not as nice as one of the good pens I keep at home but I don't think it's fair to describe as "crap" in most contexts.
Sure, but the statement doesn't change the material aspects of the goods. If it was true then they were crap before, if it was not then they remain in the affordable category afterwards.
Then again, jewelry is to a large extent about perception and not their material properties.
Re: A man who destroyed his multimillion dollar company in 10 seconds (2018)
#90What kind of jewelry did people think they were getting for a few quid?
Of course, everyone who bought it already knew it was crap. It's the same thing for buying $15K engagement rings. Everyone knows it's a stupid use of money and that the rings have no value. Same goes for clothing, cars, and many other things. These types of products succeed because of a shared delusion. Take fashion for instance. Everyone believes some clothes are more fashionable than others. The way you dress says…
It's not delusion, it's signaling.