Ok, so we agree that having $1 billion is better despite diminishing returns. So I still donāt understand this statement:
When EA was more funding constrained, a $1M grant with 10X ROI looked better than a $1B grant with 5x ROI
Are you saying that in 2011, we would have preferred $1M over $1B? Or does ālook betterā just refer to the benefit to cost ratio?
I think I see the confusion.
No, I meant an intervention that could produce 10x ROI on $1M looked better than an intervention that could produce 5x ROI on $1B, and now the opposite is true (or should be).
Ok, so we agree that having $1 billion is better despite diminishing returns. So I still donāt understand this statement:
Are you saying that in 2011, we would have preferred $1M over $1B? Or does ālook betterā just refer to the benefit to cost ratio?
I think I see the confusion.
No, I meant an intervention that could produce 10x ROI on $1M looked better than an intervention that could produce 5x ROI on $1B, and now the opposite is true (or should be).