Your distinction between a rising number and a changing measurement is useful far beyond quantum computing. I’d add a wrinkle to the Amazon comparison: repeat-order share can rise because existing customers buy more, but also because fewer new customers arrive, so cohort retention would help separate those explanations. For these businesses, what would you consider the strongest evidence of customers finding lasting value—repeat purchases, paid usage, or renewals after the initial research contract?
Good Point on the denominator. Amazons repeat share only held up because accounts went 1.5m to 6.2m in the same year. Flat accounts would have made it a certain warning. The way I see renewals is a second system can just be a second grant and paid usage is cheap to keep alive. A renewal after the research contract cost the customer something to say yes to. Neither company discloses it, which is the problem.
Thank you, that clarifies the distinction nicely. A customer choosing to renew once the research funding ends would tell us something that another grant-funded purchase cannot. Your point about disclosure matters too: without that information, the commercial case remains difficult to assess. I appreciate the thoughtful reply.
Your distinction between a rising number and a changing measurement is useful far beyond quantum computing. I’d add a wrinkle to the Amazon comparison: repeat-order share can rise because existing customers buy more, but also because fewer new customers arrive, so cohort retention would help separate those explanations. For these businesses, what would you consider the strongest evidence of customers finding lasting value—repeat purchases, paid usage, or renewals after the initial research contract?
Good Point on the denominator. Amazons repeat share only held up because accounts went 1.5m to 6.2m in the same year. Flat accounts would have made it a certain warning. The way I see renewals is a second system can just be a second grant and paid usage is cheap to keep alive. A renewal after the research contract cost the customer something to say yes to. Neither company discloses it, which is the problem.
Thank you, that clarifies the distinction nicely. A customer choosing to renew once the research funding ends would tell us something that another grant-funded purchase cannot. Your point about disclosure matters too: without that information, the commercial case remains difficult to assess. I appreciate the thoughtful reply.