Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 0
I admit that I was really surprised by Jaffe's slam. I thought his research on our book lacked thoroughness and was disappointed by his conclusions. That said, hey, this all comes with the territory -- and I'm always open to dissenting opinions.

That said, I actually believe that the Rule Maker model can be (and in many ways, has been) backtested. I have no idea how Jaffe can come to the conclusion that the Maker approach wouldn't have ruled out a second-rate business model like that at Wang. Had he gone back and applied the criteria to Wang, he would've found low margins, declining sales, and mismanaged inventory.

The conclusions he drew in his column leave me no other choice than to believe he went in heavily biased, with an agenda. I come out of it more certain than ever that the traditional, we-tell-the-people-what-to-think media are in serious trouble. Open communities will hurt reporters that let bias replace detailed research.

Label me disappointed by this one -- but quite satisfied with the more constructive criticism we've received on this and our other books.

Foolishly,

Tom Gardner
Print the post  

Announcements

What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.