Right, but... a weakness of academia is that too often ideas aren’t expected to pay their own rent
Shots fired 
I think a goalpost shifted a bit there — from "recognition" to "money in." Yes, lots of companies lose money before they make money. But few companies look like abject failures for years under the guidance of someone who is later determined to be a business genius.
-
-
Maybe it's that an integral part of what businesses are for must be recognition by the customers, or at least by their wallets. If a business fails, one might say later 'his product was great but ahead of its time'. But one cannot call his *business* great.
-
Yeah, I think that's what I'm trying to grasp at... "unsuccessful business" seems a lot more self-evident than "incorrect speculation." "People will buy this!" is not just a testable claim, it's a claim that *can't* hide from testing
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
If I was being a devils advocate I'd say that maybe in business you first need to win the "recognition game" before you can even start playing the "money game". Because an unrecognised business genius would just be replaced and never get the chance to be subsequently recognised.
-
... but alas I don't think that's what the reality of the situation is.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.