Re: Something of a scenario idea

["Robert J. Hansen" <cortana@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> There are good reasons NOT to do that, like fear of getting
> into court battle if person to be rescued dies and her family
> sues company that wanted her rescued. This depends on legal

You apparently believe that corporations always do what's in their best
interests.  They don't, as is evidenced by the tidal flood of
minority-shareholder lawsuits in America claiming that management isn't
acting in the best interests of the company.

Companies do what is *cheapest*.  The smart companies do what's cheaper in
the long run; the dumb ones--and there are a lot of dumb ones--do what's
cheaper in the short run.

If it costs $1,000,000 to mount a rescue operation with 50/50 odds of
success, and the average out-of-court settlement for a botched operation is
$5,000,000, then the risk-reward cost of the rescue mission is $3.5 million
( ($1 mil * .5) + ($6 mil * .5) ).

If it costs $2,000,000 to negotiate a release with 80/20 odds of success,
and the average out-of-court settlement for a botched negotiation is
$5,000,000, then the risk-reward cost of the negotiation is $3 million ( ($2
mil * .8) + ($7 mil * .2)).

Answer: company chooses to negotiate.

Change the situation.  Say that your employee has unique and specialized
knowledge which your company needs, and every month you don't have that
employee costs your firm $125,000 (assuming $1.5 mil a year salary for your
exec).  Suddenly, the cost of the rescue operation rises to $3.63 million.
The cost of the negotiation rises to $4 million.

Answer: company hires mercenaries for the hostile extraction.

That's how companies think.  Smart ones think in the long term ("even if we
successfully rescue this exec by force, that'll just mean they're more
likely to execute the next hostage in retaliation, so maybe we'd better
negotiate").

But there are a lot of stupid companies who only think in the short term
("the risk-reward is $370,000 cheaper if we mount the rescue operation"),
and who would be plenty glad to hire mercs to accomplish the task.

H. Ross Perot being a particularly fine example.  :)

> Personally I find your numbers too 'good' so to say. That
> is 50 times 19 = 950 extractions a year. Think about that
> number, a billion dollar industry. Way too high.

Kidnapping *IS* a billion dollar industry worldwide.  And that's just in the
ransom payments.