At 12:05 PM -0700 4/25/01, Richard Fiero wrote:
>Tim May wrote:
>>>
>>I'll provide a data point about what corporations want: they hire a
>>_lot_ of MBAs, but not a lot of "economists." Sure, MBAs have to
>>complete a series of econ courses, probably based on Samuelson and
>>the various micro- and macro-econ courses, but mostly corporations
>>are seeking those with tools to manage businesses, markets, product
>>lines, etc. Classical economics is not a focus.
>>
>
>Much of Microsoft's and Intel's profits of last year were from
>investment income, not from selling product. You really think a
>startup MBA and an Intel MBA get together, believe each other's line
>of bullshit and do a deal? Fucken grow up. A trillion dollars a day
>sloshes around in currency market transactions, every day. MBAs
>again, I'm sure. Best of all, corporate planning is not central
>planning. What a fucken laugh!
Depends on the definition of "much." In Intel's case, operating
profits in 2000 were around $10.3 billion. Investment income was $3.7
billion, compared to less than a billion the year before and only
around $100 million the year before that. In other words, Intel got
out while the getting was good on a lot of the dot coms.
I'd say $10.3 billion on "selling product" is a pretty good business to be in.
As for who runs the investment operations, I know a bunch of them.
Do they hire economists? Sure. I never said companies like Intel
don't hire economists. They hire currency arb experts, trade policy
experts, rate swap folks, etc. But I said they hire a lot more
B-school folks than classically trained economists.
As for your "Fucken grow up," you are quite the wit. No wonder you
are so parsimonious with your contributions to this list.
--Tim May
--
Timothy C. May [EMAIL PROTECTED] Corralitos, California
Political: Co-founder Cypherpunks/crypto anarchy/Cyphernomicon
Technical: physics/soft errors/Smalltalk/Squeak/agents/games/Go
Personal: b.1951/UCSB/Intel '74-'86/retired/investor/motorcycles/guns
