Read the Money
Sunk cost and leverage
Two thoughts have bankrupted more owners than any recession: 'I've put too much in to quit now,' and 'a little debt will amplify this.' Both feel like commitment and courage. Both, misused, turn one bad decision into a chain of them.
Money, time, and effort already spent are gone and irrecoverable. The only rational question is whether the additional investment is worth the reward you can still get — you never have to earn money back the same way you lost it. 'I've invested too much to quit' is the single most expensive sentence in business.
A seasoned builder started a 26-unit building budgeted near 300,000. Excavation uncovered hidden blue clay that made the foundation unstable. Rather than walk away from what he'd already spent, he pressed on — pledging another building and the family home as collateral. Final cost topped 1,000,000, more than the finished building was worth, and he spent the rest of his career fighting angry investors and lawyers.
The trap is pouring good money after bad to avoid 'wasting' what's already spent. Each step feels like protecting the last one, but the past investment can't be saved — you're only ever deciding about the future. Doubling down to recover losses is how one bad call becomes ten.
Leverage — borrowing to invest — multiplies returns on the way up and losses on the way down by the exact same factor. It is never free upside. The only defensible use of debt is to buy a genuine force multiplier you truly can't access otherwise — never to pay yourself, fund a fancy office, or prop up a business with structural problems.
Put 20,000 as a 20% deposit on a 100,000 asset: if it doubles you make 100,000 (5×); if it halves you lose 50,000. Now split the same 20,000 across four assets, borrowing 380,000: doubling makes 400,000 (20×) — but halving loses ~200,000 (4×). Same money, magnified both ways.
After its foam clogs became a surprise hit, Crocs treated the fad as permanent, built a large factory in China, and mass-produced millions of shoes — a big amortization bet that continued demand would spread the cost thin.
→ The fad cooled sharply. Crocs was buried in idle capacity and unsellable inventory; its stock collapsed from about 75 to about 1, it posted a ~185 million loss in 2008, and cut around 2,000 jobs.
Every amortization and ROI calculation is a prediction, and Crocs bet big capital on a forecast that continued sales would hold — it didn't. But the honest coda: Crocs did NOT die. It restructured, survived, and later hit record revenue above 2 billion. Near-death is survivable with discipline; near-death is not death.
Crocs' recovery cuts the other way too: nearly dying is not the same as dying. If a leveraged or sunk-cost mistake has wounded you, disciplined focus on future cash and reward — not on recovering the past — can still turn it around. The lesson isn't 'never risk,' it's 'decide only on what's ahead.'
When deciding whether to continue anything, erase what you've already spent from the equation and ask only: is the future reward worth the future cost? And treat debt as rocket fuel — it lifts a sound business and blows up a broken one, magnifying losses exactly as much as gains.
Pick the project you're clinging to mostly because of what you've already put in. Ignore that spent money entirely and ask: starting from today, is the future payoff worth the future cost? Decide on that answer alone — and if you'd need to borrow to continue, be doubly sure.
Money already spent should play what role in today's decision — and if borrowing can double your gains, what exactly does it do to your losses?
Read the Money