←back to thread

249 points randycupertino | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
stego-tech ◴[] No.45949690[source]
I feel kinda bad for the writer, because it's a good question: no, curing patients is not a good business model, just like public transit is not a good business model.

What a lot of folks neglect are N+1-order effects, because those are harder to quantify and fail to reach the predetermined decision some executive or board or shareholder has already made. Is curing patients a bad business model? Sure, for the biotech company it is, but those cured patients are far more likely to go on living longer, healthier lives, and in turn contribute additional value to society - which will impact others in ways that may also create additional value. That doesn't even get into the jobs and value created through the R&D process, testing, manufacturing, logistics of delivery, ongoing monitoring, etc. As long as the value created is more than the cost of the treatment, then it's a net-gain for the economy even if it's a net loss for that singular business.

If all you're judging is the first-order impacts on a single business, you're missing the forest for the trees.

replies(21): >>45949742 #>>45949753 #>>45949762 #>>45949770 #>>45949870 #>>45949906 #>>45950012 #>>45950170 #>>45950199 #>>45950225 #>>45950250 #>>45950263 #>>45950419 #>>45950655 #>>45950858 #>>45950892 #>>45950987 #>>45951787 #>>45952894 #>>45952915 #>>45955069 #
socalgal2 ◴[] No.45950250[source]
> ~public~ transit is not a good business model.

~public~ transit can be a good business model if it's setup correctly. The majority of Japan's 100 train companies are setup such that they own both trains and complementary interests. Office buildings, shopping centers, super markets, apartments. The better their trains are the better their other businesses do by delivering people to them. The better their other businesses are the more people want to use their trains.

https://ir.tokyu.co.jp/ja/ir/news/auto_20251111595684/pdfFil...

replies(7): >>45950290 #>>45950324 #>>45950357 #>>45950479 #>>45950648 #>>45950788 #>>45954481 #
CGMthrowaway ◴[] No.45950479[source]
This reminds me of the way ski resorts work in the US. One company builds the ski resort (losing) but also develops all the real estate around it (winning). It only works if it's a resort worth living near.

Or casinos, which are the reverse. Build hotels, entertainment etc (losing) to support traffic to your casino (winning)

replies(2): >>45951638 #>>45953248 #
netsharc ◴[] No.45953248{3}[source]
Won't real estate near ski resorts become hotels? Or does the word "resort" mean there are on-site hotels?
replies(1): >>45953837 #
1. CGMthrowaway ◴[] No.45953837{4}[source]
There are hotels but the real money for ski resorts is in the condos, timeshares and houses that are sold on the nearby land. When I said "ski resort" I mean lift-serviced terrain and all the supporting infrastructure for skiiers during the day