KCC 105 Final Project: Research Portion ✓ Solved

KCC 105 Final Project: Research Portion. Project Description

KCC 105 Final Project: Research Portion. Project Description: Can a business grow without limit? Many of you own Apple products—MacBooks, iPhones, iPads, Watches, etc. The stock price of Apple has grown considerably since it first launched the original iPhone. Do you think that Apple will eventually reach a point where it will no longer make such large quarterly gains and its stock price flattens out? Some have claimed that Apple will soon reach the limits of the Law of Large Numbers. If this theory is true, Apple’s stock price will fluctuate around an expected value and will not make any more large gains. What you must answer: Are stocks bound to follow the Law of Large Numbers? If so, shouldn’t we avoid investing in well-developed companies like Apple? If not, what possible advances (technological or otherwise) would help a highly successful company defy such statistical rules? Required sources: cite the two required sources: numbers-common-sense.html and MIT's Guide to Good Game Analysis, plus at least two additional sources to support your position. Requirements: include a game argument as a thesis statement, a game overview, analysis, and a conclusion summary; use course vocabulary (Mechanics, Dynamics, Elements of Chance, Elements of Skill, Twitch Skill, Risk vs Reward, etc.).

Paper For Above Instructions

Thesis (Game Argument)

The Law of Large Numbers places statistical limits on average outcomes across many independent trials, but stock prices—and particularly those of large technology firms like Apple—are not simple independent trials; they are dynamic systems influenced by innovation, network effects, strategic decisions, and market structure. Thus, stocks are not strictly bound to a static application of the Law of Large Numbers; well-developed firms can continue to produce outsized gains when game-like dynamics (innovation mechanics, network dynamics, shifts in elements of skill and chance) create new value pathways (Fama, 1970; Christensen, 1997).

Game Overview

Using MIT's Guide to Good Game Analysis as a structural template (MIT Game Lab, n.d.), this "game" frames investing in Apple as a competitive system with defined mechanics, dynamics, players, and payoffs. Mechanics: firm capabilities (R&D, supply chain, patent portfolio), market rules (regulation, accounting), and product-release cadence. Dynamics: emergent phenomena such as network effects, platform lock-in, user adoption curves, and competitive responses (Katz & Shapiro, 1985). Elements of Chance: macroeconomic shocks, regulatory changes, and black swans (Taleb, 2007). Elements of Skill: management execution, innovation strategy, and marketing (Christensen, 1997). Twitch Skill is less relevant to long-term investing, but rapid execution (e.g., supply-chain response to demand spikes) can resemble short-term reflexive advantages. Risk vs Reward: investors weigh potential upside from sustained innovation against downside from disruption or market saturation (Silver, 2012).

Analysis

1. The Law of Large Numbers (LLN) and financial returns: LLN states that averages over many independent, identically distributed trials converge to expected values. Classic finance models (Samuelson, 1965; Fama, 1970) use random-walk and efficient market assumptions suggesting price changes are largely unpredictable. Empirically, however, aggregate stock-return behavior and firm-specific trajectories show deviations due to non-independence, heterogeneity of trials, and structural change (Bessembinder, 2018).

2. Why LLN is a limited lens for large firms: Apple’s historical growth was not a series of identical, independent trials; each product launch, platform expansion, and ecosystem move changed the game's state. Technological innovation and platform dynamics produce path-dependence and feedback loops (network effects), violating LLN prerequisites (Katz & Shapiro, 1985). For example, the iPhone created an ecosystem (App Store, accessory makers) that amplified revenue channels beyond simple repeat sales (Christensen, 1997). Such emergent dynamics can allow continued outsized returns despite the firm's size.

3. Role of innovation and competition: Sustained above-average gains require structural shifts—new product categories, services, or markets. Christensen’s disruptive innovation framework explains how incumbents can both be challenged and reinvent themselves; incumbents that successfully cultivate new mechanics (services, subscription models) can reset expected outcomes for investors (Christensen, 1997). Apple’s shift toward services and wearables illustrates this mechanism (Shiller, 2000).

4. Risk factors that push toward LLN-like behavior: As firms grow, diversification and market maturity can reduce volatility and expected high-percentage gains—returns may converge toward market averages. Additionally, as firm size grows, marginal returns on incremental investment can diminish, producing mean-reversion tendencies consistent with LLN intuition (Ross, Westerfield, & Jaffe, 2013).

5. Probability, fat tails, and rare events: Taleb’s Black Swan critique shows that rare, high-impact events can dominate long-run outcomes; these events are not well-modeled by LLN when distributions are heavy-tailed (Taleb, 2007). In practice, a single transformative innovation (or catastrophic failure) can produce outsized changes in firm value, meaning that large companies can still produce large gains (or losses) unpredictably.

6. Game vocabulary applied: Mechanics (R&D cadence, platform APIs), Dynamics (ecosystem lock-in, user adoption feedback), Elements of Chance (macro shocks), Elements of Skill (management decisions), Twitch Skill (fast operational responses), Risk vs Reward (trade-offs in investment)—these concepts show investing is a strategic game where LLN is one statistical tool but not a definitive rule (MIT Game Lab, n.d.; Silver, 2012).

Practical Implications for Investors

Should investors avoid well-developed companies? Not necessarily. If a firm demonstrates ongoing capacity to alter the game's mechanics—through new platforms, services, network expansion, or M&A—it can sustain above-average returns. Diversified portfolios remain prudent because LLN-like averaging can apply at portfolio levels, reducing idiosyncratic risk. However, investors must evaluate a company's ability to create new growth engines, not assume historical growth will continue without structural change (Bessembinder, 2018; Christensen, 1997).

Conclusion Summary

The Law of Large Numbers provides useful intuition about averages and risk, but it does not rigidly bind stock behavior in dynamic markets. Large firms such as Apple operate within game-like systems where innovation, network effects, strategy, and rare events reshape the probability landscape. Investors should therefore assess whether a company can change the game's mechanics to create new value pools rather than avoid mature companies solely because of size. Prudent investing combines awareness of LLN principles with analysis of firm-specific dynamics, the presence of competitive moats, and the capacity for meaningful structural change (Fama, 1970; Taleb, 2007; Christensen, 1997).

References

  • Bessembinder, H. (2018). Do stocks outperform Treasury bills? Journal of Financial Economics, 129(3), 440–467.
  • Christensen, C. M. (1997). The Innovator's Dilemma. Harvard Business School Press.
  • Fama, E. F. (1970). Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work. Journal of Finance, 25(2), 383–417.
  • Katz, M. L., & Shapiro, C. (1985). Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility. American Economic Review, 75(3), 424–440.
  • MIT Game Lab. (n.d.). MIT's Guide to Good Game Analysis. Retrieved from https://gamelab.mit.edu (Guide to game argument, overview, analysis, and conclusion).
  • Ross, S. A., Westerfield, R., & Jaffe, J. (2013). Corporate Finance (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
  • Samuelson, P. A. (1965). Proof that properly anticipated prices fluctuate randomly. Industrial Management Review, 6, 41–49.
  • Shiller, R. J. (2000). Irrational Exuberance. Princeton University Press.
  • Silver, N. (2012). The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail — but Some Don't. Penguin.
  • Taleb, N. N. (2007). The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable. Random House.
  • Numbers: Common Sense. (n.d.). Retrieved from /numbers-common-sense.html

Related Assignments