It's kinda hard to quantify exactly - but I look at many things differently. For instance, when I see a product (say in a store, or on TV or something) one of the first things I think about is margins. As in, I immediately start to try and figure out if the margins are fat or thin. Thin margins means that the manufacturer is selling it at barely above cost (which is bad, in my humble opinion - but it depends on your perspective and your goal for that product, because Amazon sells all its hardware on thin margins because that fits into a broader goal which is to sell digital products to you once you own their hardware).
I like to see high-quality products that can command a fat margin in the marketplace, because it usually means that the company will be profitable and can continue making high-quality products (all other things being equal - like they don't commit PR suicide or they don't fumble on the production, etc.).
So that's one subtle way, another way is by evaluating public figures.
One of the most eye-opening things I have experienced is seeing "knowledgeable" people talk absolute garbage and many people listening to them without questioning what they are saying.
One such example is when Jack Welch did his rant about the jobs numbers right before the elections. I am not even talking about from a political perspective, but here you have a "world renowned" ex-CEO of a large company (one of the largest on the planet) and he is talking shit. He knows that the numbers can't be fabricated easily because of the way the system is setup, he also knows that any candidate that fudges the numbers has more to lose than to gain. As in, if Obama did fudge the numbers and the word got out, that would be the end of him. Period. No questions asked. The risk is too large for the reward.
But there are many people that would see who he is, and what he did and assume that he is speaking gospel. But because they don't understand the way the system works, and the incentives at play (Welch is going to be hit with much higher taxes, so obviously he has a vested interest in attacking Obama) they are oblivious and they believe him. Obama "must be" fudging the numbers. It doesn't quite work like that.
Yes, gov'ts do hide things and there are stuff they do that they don't want to get out - but when you understand the incentives that reporters/journalists (and more recently bloggers and every day ppl with smartphones, etc.) have to break "huge stories" you appreciate that it is harder to keep "huge" things secret.
Plus, I see startup ideas and companies differently - again...one of the most drastic changes is that I look at margins more, because they kinda tell you what type of company you have to build. In a thin margin company, there is very little room for error....because the profit you earn on each transaction is so small, so it takes you longer to build up a buffer to help you weather storms. Whereas if you have fat margins, you are more likely to be able to weather winds that will kill thinner margin companies.
One glaring example is looking at the differences in margins of two large companies. Walmart & Apple.
Walmart - $445B in revenues in the last reported year, $15.7B in profits.
Apple - $156B in revenues, $41.7B in profits.
So Apple did 1/3rd the revenues, but 3X the profits.
I would much rather run Apple than Walmart. That's just a personal preference. Many people thrive in the low-margin business....Walmart & Amazon are.
That decision, dictates the culture of the company you create. With a fat-margin business, you can invest more liberally in innovation and pay a premium for talent - it's much harder to do that (at the same scale) as with a fat-margin business.
Hope that provides some clarity, let me know if you have any other questions.
Edit 1: As for resources, I would check the finance & economics section of Khan Academy for starters. Then from there just do some reading on the various topics you have learned and start to consume quality journalism like the Financial Times or the Economist. It is staggering the garbage printed/shown elsewhere. Also, try to turn off CNN if you can.
I like to see high-quality products that can command a fat margin in the marketplace, because it usually means that the company will be profitable and can continue making high-quality products (all other things being equal - like they don't commit PR suicide or they don't fumble on the production, etc.).
So that's one subtle way, another way is by evaluating public figures.
One of the most eye-opening things I have experienced is seeing "knowledgeable" people talk absolute garbage and many people listening to them without questioning what they are saying.
One such example is when Jack Welch did his rant about the jobs numbers right before the elections. I am not even talking about from a political perspective, but here you have a "world renowned" ex-CEO of a large company (one of the largest on the planet) and he is talking shit. He knows that the numbers can't be fabricated easily because of the way the system is setup, he also knows that any candidate that fudges the numbers has more to lose than to gain. As in, if Obama did fudge the numbers and the word got out, that would be the end of him. Period. No questions asked. The risk is too large for the reward.
But there are many people that would see who he is, and what he did and assume that he is speaking gospel. But because they don't understand the way the system works, and the incentives at play (Welch is going to be hit with much higher taxes, so obviously he has a vested interest in attacking Obama) they are oblivious and they believe him. Obama "must be" fudging the numbers. It doesn't quite work like that.
Yes, gov'ts do hide things and there are stuff they do that they don't want to get out - but when you understand the incentives that reporters/journalists (and more recently bloggers and every day ppl with smartphones, etc.) have to break "huge stories" you appreciate that it is harder to keep "huge" things secret.
Plus, I see startup ideas and companies differently - again...one of the most drastic changes is that I look at margins more, because they kinda tell you what type of company you have to build. In a thin margin company, there is very little room for error....because the profit you earn on each transaction is so small, so it takes you longer to build up a buffer to help you weather storms. Whereas if you have fat margins, you are more likely to be able to weather winds that will kill thinner margin companies.
One glaring example is looking at the differences in margins of two large companies. Walmart & Apple.
Walmart - $445B in revenues in the last reported year, $15.7B in profits. Apple - $156B in revenues, $41.7B in profits.
So Apple did 1/3rd the revenues, but 3X the profits.
I would much rather run Apple than Walmart. That's just a personal preference. Many people thrive in the low-margin business....Walmart & Amazon are.
That decision, dictates the culture of the company you create. With a fat-margin business, you can invest more liberally in innovation and pay a premium for talent - it's much harder to do that (at the same scale) as with a fat-margin business.
Hope that provides some clarity, let me know if you have any other questions.
Edit 1: As for resources, I would check the finance & economics section of Khan Academy for starters. Then from there just do some reading on the various topics you have learned and start to consume quality journalism like the Financial Times or the Economist. It is staggering the garbage printed/shown elsewhere. Also, try to turn off CNN if you can.