> Acme won the auction because it was able to bid more. It was able to bid more because it has better lifetime value per customer, i.e. it does a better job of satisfying customer needs.
This is obviously not true. What if they are backed by investors? And there are a gazillion other reasons why they could spend more on that ad ...
I agree that could nix the argument about better lifetime value per customer. I think the overall argument ends up going through anyways, because investors want to invest in companies that make good products. Paul Graham is constantly emphasizing the importance of pleasing your customers.
>And there are a gazillion other reasons why they could spend more on that ad ...
I think ads are still statistical evidence though.
It depends on if you can make up for a crappy product by good advertising and end up with a net profit. That this is not possible is what you should prove.
This is obviously not true. What if they are backed by investors? And there are a gazillion other reasons why they could spend more on that ad ...