WebVan isn&#x27;t the right analogy - a real estate bubble is a better one.<p>In the .com bubble, no one was really sure how things would shake out, so there were lots of companies who wouldn&#x27;t have succeeded no matter how big they got (the &quot;losing money on every sale but making it up in volume&quot; business plan). When the .com bubble crashed, real estate was seen as a much stronger investment because no matter how low it went, it was real &quot;stuff&quot; that had a sort of intrinsic value - it may go down, but it wouldn&#x27;t go to 0. A similar thing happened in Tokyo real estate circa early 90s. A Tokyo apartment still has a lot of value - you&#x27;d probably think it very expensive - but it&#x27;s still 80% cheaper than it was at its peak.<p>The problem with lots of companies now isn&#x27;t that they won&#x27;t ever be profitable, or that they don&#x27;t have realistic business plans, it&#x27;s just that their valuation is way more than their earning stream will ever support. They are valued at &quot;we&#x27;ll eventually take over the market&quot; prices, even though they&#x27;ll only ever reach niche market status.