<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: One Hit Wonders Are At Work Too</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.businesspundit.com/one-hit-wonders-are-at-work-too/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.businesspundit.com/one-hit-wonders-are-at-work-too/</link>
	<description>Entrepreneurship, Startup Companies and Business Philosophy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 15:12:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: G Lardo</title>
		<link>http://www.businesspundit.com/one-hit-wonders-are-at-work-too/comment-page-1/#comment-1138</link>
		<dc:creator>G Lardo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:41:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.businesspundit.com.php5-6.websitetestlink.com/?p=2743#comment-1138</guid>
		<description>Odds are that _most_ financially successful people are &quot;one hit wonders&quot;. And that can be proven:

If P(s) is the probability  of being successful in one endeavor, then the odds of doing so twice is P(s)*P(s), and the odds of being successful n times is
P(s)*P(s)...P(s) [n times].

P(s) is less than 1 (usually _much_ less than 1) and the odds of being successful more than one time diminish rapidly. Therefore most successful people, by any criteria, will be &quot;one hit wonders&quot;.

So really the article has nothing new to say, the subject being a simple mathematical result. No survey is necessary.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Odds are that _most_ financially successful people are &#8220;one hit wonders&#8221;. And that can be proven:</p>
<p>If P(s) is the probability  of being successful in one endeavor, then the odds of doing so twice is P(s)*P(s), and the odds of being successful n times is<br />
P(s)*P(s)&#8230;P(s) [n times].</p>
<p>P(s) is less than 1 (usually _much_ less than 1) and the odds of being successful more than one time diminish rapidly. Therefore most successful people, by any criteria, will be &#8220;one hit wonders&#8221;.</p>
<p>So really the article has nothing new to say, the subject being a simple mathematical result. No survey is necessary.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J</title>
		<link>http://www.businesspundit.com/one-hit-wonders-are-at-work-too/comment-page-1/#comment-1137</link>
		<dc:creator>J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jun 2006 01:16:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.businesspundit.com.php5-6.websitetestlink.com/?p=2743#comment-1137</guid>
		<description>What if the one hit was getting into and graduating from the right school or getting hired by the right company out of school?  If the boss considers that evidence of brilliance even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, how can you communicate that the board or senior management before it&#039;s too late?


p.s. - I&#039;m still getting the menu on the left side of the screen and posts about two feet down from
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What if the one hit was getting into and graduating from the right school or getting hired by the right company out of school?  If the boss considers that evidence of brilliance even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, how can you communicate that the board or senior management before it&#8217;s too late?</p>
<p>p.s. &#8211; I&#8217;m still getting the menu on the left side of the screen and posts about two feet down from</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
