Earlier quoted context omitted.
She teaches a class at Stanford and offers each team $5 of 'funding' in an envelope. She tells them that once they open the envelope, they have 2 hours to make as much money as they can. She cites three teams' approaches: 1) First team opens a free stand that offers to check peoples bike tire pressure for free, then charges $1 to inflate if necessary. This team changes midstream to accepting donations instead of char…
Thanks for the synopsis. I'm curious, though, what makes the solutions 'immoral' or dishonest? They seem perfectly legitimate to me.
I have to say, I'm even more amused by people's outrage at these winning tactics than by the tactics themselves. I begin to understand why it's necessary to have an entire class in entrepreneurship. Perhaps it is largely about training people not to be pinned, like hapless chess pieces, by the force of trivial preconceptions.