“We knew that we could do things differently to get a better valuation in the moment, do things that would please investors more. But we were very confident, and so far history has proven us right, that if we continue to optimize for the rate of compounding of free cash flows, in the long run those would be much higher than the other path. Even if the multiple were to turn out to be lower, ultimately the multiple is just one factor in a multiplication. If the other factor is 10 times bigger, rest assured, the overall result is going to be bigger too.”

It's just a problem to solve like all problems. You want to understand what your objective is, what the boundary conditions are, and then once those are clear, you creatively list all the options and pick the best one. So if your goal is to say make as much money as possible, then it may be smart to again accept or play along with those expectations. As long as you know what you're trying to accomplish and why you're doing it, then you're fine. But there are alternatives and they may not necessarily lead to the greatest financial outcome or sometimes they may, it depends on the specifics. So you could choose to run a business without necessarily relying on issuing equity or selling your stake and trying to make it in the long run a great cash generative enterprise that will ultimately create value for you through, for example, dividends. Or alternatively, you may work to maximize free cash flows in the long run in a way that does not get you the biggest valuation today, but will in the very long run. I think you could argue this is a little bit what we did with Bending Spoons. There have been multiple instances where we knew that we could do things differently to get a better valuation in the moment, do things that would please investors more, buy a certain type of asset, manage that asset in a different way. But we knew, at least…