Why Do So Many Famous Companies Lose Billions Every Year?
Not making money is the new making money
Not making money is the new making money

Uber reported a $1.1 billion net loss in Q3 2020.
Pinterest burned $208 million in Q4.
Airbnb lost $696 million for the year.
Snapchat lost $944 million in 2020.
Donโt blame the pandemic.
These companies have been losing money for years:
Airbnb lost $135 million in 2015, $136 million in 2016, $70 million in 2017, $16 million in 2018, and $674 million in 2019, with total cumulative losses since 2008 totaling $2.8 billion.
Take a look at Snapchatโs performance:

This company is supposedly โworthโ $120 billion.
Itโs the same for Blue Apron, Casper, Lime, Dropbox, Lyft, Peloton, Slack, Wayfair, WeWork, Deliveroo, SoundCloud, Ocado, Zillow โ pretty much every company you know that was started in the past decade or so โ all of them went public for billions despite losing vast amounts of money.
According to one IPO specialist, โIn 2018, 81% of U.S. companies were unprofitable in the year leading up to their public offerings.โ
The real question is: How the heck do these companies still exist?
Financialization
โWe used to build things in this country, now we just stick our hands in another guyโs pocket.โ โ Frank Zbotka, The Wire
All of these companies are based on somewhat cool ideas and have good-looking brands, but theyโre not groundbreaking patentable innovations that wonโt eventually face brutal competition, host revolts, and democratic backlash. Plus, their underlying business model is fundamentally unsustainable.
Yesterdayโs biggest companies used to own assets and create goods and services. Todayโs biggest companies own almost no assets and produce neither goods nor services, but instead act as middlemen who take an irrationally large cut for their minor role in the process.
Uber and Lyft donโt own cars or drive people around.
Facebook/IG/Snap donโt create content for its users to enjoy.
Amazon doesnโt produce most of the products in its store.
Airbnb doesnโt own houses or host travelers.
So how did these companies come to dominate their industries?
One word: Financialization.
Amazonโs Jeff Bezos was the first person to really perfect this insidious art, and these famous โtechโ companies are just the latest to capitalize on the lethal gambit. The process is simple:
Find a way to โdisruptโ an industry of real producers. (IE book publishers, taxi drivers, content creators, house hosts, etc.)
Create an attractive site/app and charge a fat fee as the broker.
Build a huge amount of media hype to attract colossal amounts of debt and private equity across several rounds of funding.
Rather than paying a dividend to shareholders, use their original investment and their annual profits to strengthen your team and strangle your competition. Make sure the story of your rapid expansion overshadows your mounting losses.
Once youโve destroyed the competition and have finally started to turn a meager profit, use the money to swallow up-and-coming competitors and coerce democracy to extract advantages that small companies canโt get.
If this sounds like a giant, anti-meritocratic unethical fraud, itโs because it is.
A new paradigm
The most important article Iโve ever written is This Real Estate Bubble Wonโt Pop. In it, I explain that a houseโs price used to be based on the maximum amount that an areaโs average local buyer could afford to mortgage over 25โ40 years, but that the new paradigm is that houseโs value is now the maximum amount of annual rental income that can be extracted from it by a global investor, multiplied by maximal institutional leverage.
Thereโs a new paradigm for valuing companies, too.
In previous generations, such a dismal record of profit loss would make companies like Airbnb worthless, with investors avoiding it at all costs. In todayโs fairy tale/nightmare of destructive financialization โ paired with huge amounts of hype and publicity โ Airbnb is seen as a brilliant and important investment, with stock speculators assigning them an initial public market โvalueโ of nearly $90 billion.
The old business valuation paradigm: a companyโs stock price was based on saleable tangible assets, plus net profits in the form of dividends, plus projected growth over a reasonable multiple.
The new business valuation paradigm: a companyโs stock price is based on pure media hype and the hope of a future global monopoly.
Itโs vital to understand that companies arenโt selling products and services anymoreโฆ their real product is their stock price.
Itโs all about โstory-tellingโ
Seth Godin says that all marketers are liars โ and todayโs big tech CEOs are the ultimate marketers.
Theyโre so good at storytelling and myth-making that theyโve managed to convince a generation of young, mostly Robinhood-based gamblers to boost their stock prices to the moon.
The price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio is considered the benchmark number for comparing one companyโs stock price to another. The ratio is based on the current stock price divided by the trailing 12-month earnings per share. If a stock price is $10/share, and the P/E ratio is 10, it means that company is earning $1 per share. If you buy a $10 share with a P/E of 20, itโll roughly take you 20 years to break even.
Warren Buffett likes to buy stocks with a P/E of around 12. The S&P 500โs long-term median P/E ratio is around 15.
Guest what the S&P 500โs current P/E ratio is?
More than double the century-long average. Despite the pandemic and a looming joblessness crisis. (#Bubble)
Itโs even worse for the famous financilized fantasy-factory stocks:
Netflixโs P/E is typically 50+.
Amazonโs is pushing 70.
Teslaโs P/E ratio is currently over 300. (Thatโs $0.50 worth of earnings for every $300 invested. Would you buy a business with an ROI of 0.0015%? Would you acquire a company that will take 600+ years to break even?)
Snap, Pinterest, Uber, and Airbnb donโt even have a P/E ratio because you have to have some actual profits to measure against.
Welcome to the Vampire Economy
Iโm sick of โdisruptors.โ Companies like Uber and Snap and Airbnb and Tesla are little more than story stocks. It took them a good idea and a metric ton of debt and private equity to strangled their competition. It made a few people very rich, and the wider society much poorer.
These arenโt contributing companies โ theyโre predatory corporations.
As one reader put it:
The thing that gets me is that Uber and Lyft have never made a profit, yet theyโve decimated the taxi industry and have destroyed the livelihoods of many while paying sub-minimum wages to their own drivers. All while using infrastructure they donโt pay for, and changing labor laws (in CA) intended to help the people who work for them by paying millions of $ for calculated propaganda that could have gone to helping the people that work for them! These types of vampiric, exploitative, extraction dependent business models arenโt long-term sustainable in reality and need to be eliminated because they do real damage to the world we all live in without returning any value to anyone but their shareholders. Itโs disgusting and evil.
Should society and the market really reward them for that? Or is it time to really question how we define contributing โvalueโ to society?
Do we need to stop letting them write off profits?
Do we need to start aggressively taxing them globally?
Do we need to protect workers from the gig economy?
Do we need to ban financialization?
Do we need to shatter monopolies?
The startups of tomorrow must grow businesses with sound economic foundations, on long-term sustainable models, with deep care for workers, competitors, customers, investors, democracy, and the planet. Instead of being big and famous, they need to be truly great.
Follow Jared on Medium and subscribe to Surviving Tomorrow.