There are many points for a small business to tap into one or more of their streams in a way which everybody wins. But this usually requires that no disruption takes place. Without actually adding value (to natural resources) yourself, you are allowed to remove enough value to grow an operation having share price which can outperform the underlying monopoly.
This is a common strategy with oil & chemical companies.
They can also afford to not be a pain or make you wait until the end to be financially worth it.
The first group finds they eventually have to move to get back to progressing in their career (hopefully learning from their mistake). I've known guys who moved and did change, running into them again and finding them to be completely different people, settled into family life, and quite happy. I've known guys who moved and didn't change, found themselves needing to move again in 10 years, all while cursing the world for being against them.
The second group just never progresses in their careers. You see them try to move into positions that seemingly fit such behavior, like "serial entrepreneur" or "SEO consultant". They never really grow, always behaving like they're still in their early 20s. By the time they hit their 40s, they can't pick up chicks at bars anymore and it hits home that they've wasted their life. Unfortunately, I've never met anyone who changed and turned it around.
It does come around. It just takes longer than internet scale time.
No alternative is rare, so the ratio is the interesting measure. (And no, I don't know this one.)
Does it? It seems to have worked for the president of the USA just fine and that was his exact tactic in all of his business "deals".
How sure of that are you? One of the big proponents of this strategy is currently President of the United States.
After I left I had a friend ask about the company, because they were about to a deal with them. I gave my honest opinion and suggested they be sure to get any money up front and be very careful to reduce their risk.