Employees and Investors Have Opportunity Costs: Grand Promises Are Not Enough

Between ‘a grand future promise’ and ‘a job that pays today,’ young workers are choosing to hang on. Stability has become the mainstream preference. Why? Have people lost their dreams? No. Their wallets will not allow them. A report says 61.5% of workers earn only enough to meet living expenses, sometimes with pressure even then. Only 13.2% combined describe their finances as comfortable or more than sufficient. A common and much-disliked workplace phenomenon is selling grand promises. Many managers are sincere: they genuinely believe their visions, ideals, and values. Yet it still ends in empty talk and an unhappy parting. Employees think the leader is making empty promises; the leader thinks the employee lacks vision. When pay only covers rent, a mortgage, and children, and someone counts the days until payday, talking about equity in three years, an IPO in five, or industry status in ten sounds like a joke. Many leaders have spent so long in their own circles that they have lost empathy for frontline staff. They can no longer imagine that the 54% simply trying to keep their jobs need real bread today, not distant stars and oceans. When employees choose to hang on, it is not because they lack dreams. The security you provide is not sufficient to support them. #Liu Run’s Business Report Interpretation ---- Robin: ‘Everything has an opportunity cost. You cannot expect a horse to perform well while refusing to feed it. Founders cannot rely on visions, ideals, and promises alone. They must produce results to attract and reward talent. Ask yourself how an excellent employee’s wealth might differ after ten years with you versus elsewhere, such as TSMC. If they invest their youth in your dream, what do they receive, and is it worthwhile? The same applies to investors. Capital has opportunity costs. Compare money committed to you five or seven years ago with the same amount in 0050 or TSMC. What is the difference after five or seven years? Is the return sufficient to cover early-stage risk?’