Re:The McNamara fallacy: Measurement is not understanding
by mahkeiro on Wednesday February 02, 2022 @03:01AM
(#30174960)
Just look at Intel to see a company that was managed by the accounting people. Great numbers for a few years, large dividend, etc, but now they have to spend billions and billions to put the company back on track and give it a future.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:The McNamara fallacy: Measurement is not understanding
by erosenbe0 on Wednesday February 02, 2022 @04:45AM
(#30175555)
Disagree. Intel has had continuous dividends for at least 30 years.
Few giant American companies have been as consistently successful as Intel. I can think of only Microsoft, one or two energy conglomerates like ExxonMobil, a telecom or two like Verizon, and maybe a bank like Goldman Sachs.
Re:The McNamara fallacy: Measurement is not understanding
by projektfu on Wednesday February 02, 2022 @08:05AM
(#30176925)
Abbott Labs, CR Bard, Deere & Co.
Something about staying in your lane while increasing opportunities in that lane seems to be a good long-term formula.
Re:The McNamara fallacy: Measurement is not understanding
by erosenbe0 on Wednesday February 02, 2022 @09:58AM
(#30178416)
Yep, Bard is part of BD, which is a large beast. Abbott/Abbvie always has something going for them. UnitedHealth has done well for years and years as it has grown. There might also be a stable industrial I am forgetting like a chemical company or 3M.
But overall, giant companies with 30 year runs of knockout growth and/or dividends like Intel are Cinderella stories. Google will be the next one to qualify in a few years I suppose.