"But saying there's some higher form of value that 'brands' bring that has nothing to do with building profitable businesses is disingenuous."
Where the heck did I say that? I said building profitable businesses is a formula and leadership/brands are a multiplier in that (very complex) formula.
I'm saying that A-Players with great brands have value. It's pretty hard to unravel that value. What's the financial impact of bringing Jobs back to Apple? What was the financial impact of Google buying Android? What would the financial impact be if I was running Square instead of Jack Dorsey? There's no way to know. But you can't disregard the impact of great people because you can't precisely measure it is wrong.
you said success is a formula, and because you were talking about an exit for an unprofitable company as being a success, it seemed logical to me that you ranked ceo 'brand' value over business profitability.
People have value (in general), calling some people A-players is trying to ascribe value to some, and as you say, that's hard to unravel. I agree ranking and valuing people is hard/impossible, why should we try . . . why are you trying? Why not let people show their own value by doing great things. I don't disregard the value, i just admit that we don't know it, the only thing we do know is if a business made money or not. It doesn't mean the person that started a shitty business is also shitty, but it also doesn't mean they're a success if all the sudden someone bestowed a crown of exit on them.
Where the heck did I say that? I said building profitable businesses is a formula and leadership/brands are a multiplier in that (very complex) formula.
I'm saying that A-Players with great brands have value. It's pretty hard to unravel that value. What's the financial impact of bringing Jobs back to Apple? What was the financial impact of Google buying Android? What would the financial impact be if I was running Square instead of Jack Dorsey? There's no way to know. But you can't disregard the impact of great people because you can't precisely measure it is wrong.