“I don’t see any scenario where they’re responsible for less than 10% of the value destruction, so around $4 billion.”
In my head, he is comparing the minimum size of ADLs value reduction to be 10% or 4 billion.
10% of 44 billion is 4,4 billion.
In this comment he is not saying anything about the current value except that 10% of 44 is around 4.
This is the quote:
In my head, he is comparing the minimum size of ADLs value reduction to be 10% or 4 billion. 10% of 44 billion is 4,4 billion. In this comment he is not saying anything about the current value except that 10% of 44 is around 4.
How else can you read it?
You can read it as “being responsible for 10% of the [total] value destruction, equal to $4B”.
So if they’re responsible for 10% of the total value loss, and that’s equivalent to $4B, then 100% of the total value lost would be $40B.
Otherwise you would say “they’re responsible for destroying 10% of the value”.
Right. So it’s a Schroedinger’s quote…😑
But thanks for pointing out what was obvious for others
I think you replied to the wrong comment.