I would have thought this outcome logical and heartening - yet journos have a history of baby/bath-water syndrome.
If GDP is increasing (just, tick), large corporations are steady (fair assumption) then productivity increases are due to SMEs increasing productivity (ie. capital/labour ratio).
This assumed equation is qualified in commentary around VC fund size and investments - "it's the easiest and cheapest it has ever been to start a company."
This doesn't mean more start-ups, but if it were less, means less full-time equivalents for young companies.
Think SAAS, lean and cloud computing. This along with a new attitude to risk amongst investors post-GFC (no large bets), means this data makes sense yet they've got the story completely backwards.
Comments
I would have thought this outcome logical and heartening - yet journos have a history of baby/bath-water syndrome.
If GDP is increasing (just, tick), large corporations are steady (fair assumption) then productivity increases are due to SMEs increasing productivity (ie. capital/labour ratio).
This assumed equation is qualified in commentary around VC fund size and investments - "it's the easiest and cheapest it has ever been to start a company."
This doesn't mean more start-ups, but if it were less, means less full-time equivalents for young companies.
Think SAAS, lean and cloud computing. This along with a new attitude to risk amongst investors post-GFC (no large bets), means this data makes sense yet they've got the story completely backwards.