The problem is when you sell the truth and your competitors sell "all of our graduates earn 500k within two months of graduating", which one is going to get the customers?

Part of the problem is the students themselves who see six figures and think "I want a piece of that" without necessarily being interested. The code bootcamps take full advantage of this.

How does the internet 'alleviate issues of information asymmetry'?? I thought it was well understood that this has not generally happened, except in open markets for very transparent and easily comparable products.

Holiday accommodation for example, much less complex than coding bootcamps, is far from a solved problem.

> How does the internet 'alleviate issues of information asymmetry'??

Through threads like this. Many people thinking of entering Lambda school will google it, find bad reviews and critical discussion threads and reconsider.

"Alleviate" does not mean "eradicate", surely it's easier to evaluate schools and holiday homes nowadays, compared to 1980?

It might be easier to compare them, I'm not persuaded it is any easier to evaluate them.

> Just because it’s more lucrative to rip people off doesn’t mean it doesn’t make financial sense to run a good code bootcamp.

The good code bootcamp wont be able to compete in the sort term. The scam version will first attract more customers in short term and destroy overall trust in the long term.

This is a good point, although I am not sure that it makes it impossible to survive as a good school, it just makes it harder.

But it doesn't make economic sense to work rather than steal, unless there are enforced rules and sanctions against stealing. Most people who choose to work do so either because of the sanctions, or because of various reasons which are not about maximizing returns in a narrow economic sense.

The post didn't say that it made sense _relative_ to something else, it just said running a school in the proper way didn't make economic sense, and that is not true (except in the sense pointed out in another comment, that honest schools may be outcompeted).

My point is just that a project's economic viability doesn't depend on the relative merits of other projects.

> a project's economic viability doesn't depend on the relative merits of other projects.

I'm not sure this is true - certainly the opposite of this statement is the central thesis of most investment activity.

If you are evaluating the viability of a specific project you don't vare if there are other projects that are even more profitable, you only care if the current one has a positive return on investment.

Of course when choosing between several projects, such as starting a school or launching a scam, then yes you would look at relative profitability (_and_ absolute of course).

Few people will hopefully find themselves choosing between those two options.