Stepping back, the idea with private credit was to move a lot of lending and credit risk taking away from the banks. Because if the bank fails, then it causes risk to the financial system. If a private credit fund does badly, you have sad investors. But the broader financial system is not imperiled.

And there will always be periods where credit does badly. It is the nature of these markets and lending.

TBC, I think the private credit guys got over their skis over the last 5 years and we'll see some sad investors in the next few years.

That is quite a quote. Hard to believe that wasn't long ago.

Whether the numbers are either wrong or if that is truly what support costs look like at a university would be interesting to know.

China turning off your transportation is.

Which is not being discussed enough.

And that the current situation can go on a long time but not forever.

This is an interesting observation. I've seen the same thing.

I think the clue is in the "it is a choice"...perhaps they are perceiving seeing some sort of judgement being made of Atari implicit in your argument???

In other words, it can be true at the same time that (1) The are not moving on and (2) It is a choice.

And #2 does not invalidate #1.

Equity returns ultimately come from risk premiums. (Which are small now in US equities BTW).

I’m invested in a microcap private equity fund that has returned >20-25% for years. They have high returns because they buy firms at 3-4x cashflow. You will get the high returns even with no growth. And with no increase in valuation. The returns are a function of an illiquidity premium.

With Apple explicitly, growth is expected given the valuation level. If it doesn’t grow, the share price will decline. So yes, in their case, firm is certainly under pressure to grow.

I also don’t agree with your “best interest for wages to be high and everyone else’s lower”. That is one aspect. It is more complicated. Consider Baumol Effect for starters.

I do know real people that hold views like this, but they also apply similar lens to other large countries with global footprint. So at least a consistent approach.

Anyway, at that point in 1994, the first 30-50 employees all made $$$. That included the secretaries and receptionists. They were all millionaires.

Something has changed and that is the terms that VCs and Executives have negotiated for themselves. I have not heard of any secretaries getting $$$ in a long time. There is a lot less sharing in the spoils than there used to be.