formercoder

Maybe the internet is a different place now but if these restrictions were placed on me as a kid I never would have grown up to be who I am today.

On a related note - anyone have a good pdf comparer?

I wonder what the cost difference would be if we reduced mail to 1x per week and got everyone broadband.

While we’re on the topic of carbon emissions what’s the footprint of the post office? Driving around junk, the printing of which burns carbon, with combustion engines, most of which is thrown away immediately.

Outliers exist in any distribution. Healthy people die suddenly every day. Of course it’s difficult when it’s someone close to us and I’m sorry for your friend’s struggles, but it happens.

Banks don’t have much of that risk. MBS holders have the real problem.

The basics go a long way: two factor auth and privilege minimization.

Exactly. I don’t understand why sending a letter isn’t $5. We’d get less junk, and you could still do if you really wanted / needed to.

Sorry i meant better than high yield savings.

Why are they strictly better? You remove interest rate risk at the expense of yield. They currently pay less than high interest savings.

Not any higher than SIPC

I’m not aware of anything with that risk / liquidity profile which pays better? In fact theoretically there shouldn’t be anything.

Online only banks offer great rates on savings accounts. The Fed has an influence but these rates are market driven. If you want high rates, look for them and put your money there. Many financial products are only available to the wealthy but in this case anyone can do this.

I believe SPAC targets might also have lower regulatory burdens not entirely sure.

One interesting thing about this global situation is it’s turned absolutely everyone into an armchair statistician. These are great points and I’ve never seen all of my friends so wrapped up in discussions of sampling bias.

0.8%? Could be worth billions.

Enjoy! I hope you find corporate finance as cool as I do. He’ll cover this but keep in mind there are a few differences with a firm such as yours who’s investors are less diversified.

If the cheaper capital is cheaper because it’s more restrictive.

It’s perhaps a high level answer but it’s not theoretical, if you are interested in diving deep I would highly recommend Professor Damodaran’s corporate finance course, he is the gold standard and it’s available for free on YouTube. Without repeating the entire course I’ll try and expand. The critical business metric is free cash flow, all operational data leads to that. We can project the firms free cash flows out over a period of years. Now the question is: how much should we spend to get this stream of cash? It’s not simply less than the sum of the cash flows, because the ones that come later are worth less than the ones that come sooner. To account for this, we “discount” those cash flows at a specific rate, the weighted average cost of capital. This number is where we bring in the mix of debt and equity in the firm and contains the cost of equity financing and the cost of debt financing, which mostly has to do with what interest rate the firm can borrow at. There is an optimal quantity of debt that minimizes this discount factor, thus maximizing the value of the future cash flows, it’s convex. If we can spend less than those summed discounted cash flows, funded with that optimal mix of debt and equity, we are NPV positive. This means we are generating real economic profits with our business activities.

Think about a company as an entity that invests in projects with the goal of maximizing the time-adjusted return. The company must fund those projects with either debt or equity, and each funding source has a cost. The optimal debt load is one such that the projects undertaken by the company are funded at the lowest cost.

There’s probably a middle ground given how little phds are paid. Consult as a software engineer for 1/3 time, make double janitor comp, 2/3 time on research.

And acceptable levels of currency risk.

It’s crazy that a VC would fund Quibi. Producing that content is expensive and their margins will never justify that type of equity funding.

Probably in app subscription in the future agreement

It’s actually a poorly done job by the bankers when stocks pop at ipo. Means their client left money on the table.

Why would opening up Harvard’s instruction to more of the genera public help their brand? They operate on a scarcity basis.

It’s not just about class. It’s about building your network and having experiences. Many aspects of class are also compromised online as well.

The vast, vast majority of businesses are not suitable for VC funding but have the potential to be great.

Yeah. Before recently switching to windows I’d been on Mac for 10+ years. The latter ~5 of which I’d basically forgotten the dock existed and just used Alfred / command space to type an applications name and launch it. Now on Windows I just use Windows Q and type. I honestly don’t know the last time I used a folder hierarchy.

My statement holds. The average death rate among confirmed cases may be 10%, but no well stratified group actually conforms to that rate.