Get your free personalized podcast brief
We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.
DHH explains the poker concept of "resulting"—judging a decision solely by its outcome. He argues his 2010 analysis that Facebook was overvalued was correct based on their lack of a monetization strategy at the time. The decision process was sound, even if the outcome proved him wrong.
Related Insights
Reid Hoffman's secret to successful contrarian investing isn't just finding unpopular ideas. It's about first identifying why intelligent people believe an idea like Airbnb or Facebook will fail, and then making a specific bet on why that smart critique is incorrect.
The worst feeling for an investor is not missing a successful deal they didn't understand, but investing against their own judgment in a company that ultimately fails. This emotional cost of violating one's own conviction outweighs the FOMO of passing on a hot deal.
An investor might correctly identify a company's flaw but still be wrong to pass, as great founders often fix those issues. This requires investors to have the humility to admit their ultimate conclusion was wrong, even if their initial analysis was correct, and be willing to re-engage with the startup.
Effective decision-making is not about being right all the time; it's about speed and discipline. Top traders are correct only about 55% of the time. Their real skill lies in quickly recognizing the 45% of wrong decisions and cutting their losses without ego. This principle applies to all leadership.
A good outcome does not automatically validate the decision-making process, as luck plays a significant role. Howard Marks stresses the importance of intellectual humility in recognizing that a successful result could have stemmed from wrong reasons or randomness, a crucial distinction for repeatable success.
The best macro traders (Jones, Druckenmiller, Soros) are defined by their ability to discard a viewpoint the moment facts change, rather than defending it out of ego. This intellectual flexibility is crucial for survival and success, as clinging to a wrong idea is a far greater error than admitting a mistake.
To decide whether to sell his company, Zach used the Expected Value (EV) framework. This method from gambling and investing helps remove emotion from the choice by multiplying the potential outcomes by their probability, creating a more objective basis for high-stakes decisions.
Before committing capital, professional investors rigorously challenge their own assumptions. They actively ask, "If I'm wrong, why?" This process of stress-testing an idea helps avoid costly mistakes and strengthens the final thesis.
Known as "resulting," this bias makes it impossible to evaluate decisions fairly. We may deem a choice poor simply because it led to a loss, even if the process was sound. This prevents learning from probabilistic events and encourages chasing lucky outcomes instead of repeatable strategies.
Investors often believe their analysis is correct even if their timing is off, leading to losses. The reality is that in markets, timing is not a separate variable; it's integral to being right. A poorly timed but eventually correct bet still results in a total loss.
