"Entrepreneurship is the creation or extraction of economic value"

Exactly!

But sure, I'll entertain you...

Person 1 is a so called solopreneur. Works hard. Pays bills. But eventually burns out and because no one want her/his "shares", she/he closes shop. "Damn I wish they told me about exit and the value there of...," she/he thinks. A hobby that produces revenue is not the same as producing value.

Person 2 is also solo. Does the same (i.e., works hard, etc). But she/he is constantly concerned about the shareholders. Sure, it just so happens those shareholders are her/him. Nonetheless, there are - in the mind of P2 - shareholders. Eventually, she/he sells the company to some other entity for a respectable amount of money (read: value purely defined).

Person 2 !== Person 1. No way. No how.

Again, I ask, what defines value better than, "We'll pay you for your company."? (Hint: Nuttin' does.)

Friend, the confusion is all yours. You can contort it all you want, but The Truth is:

"We want your company" === value.

p.s. A Google search? That's funny. SERPs? Talk about a lesson in lack of value.

> Person 1 is a so called solopreneur. Works hard. Pays bills. But eventually burns out and because no one want her/his "shares", she/he closes shop. "Damn I wish they told me about exit and the value there of...," she/he thinks. A hobby that produces revenue is not the same as producing value.

My old boss closed shop. Didn't want to fuss with selling to someone. He'd generated plenty of economic value to retire on and travel around the world for his retirement years. Nice big house, boat, no debt, lots in the bank. Profits for his clients, salaries for his workers, revenue to his selected vendors.

No acquisition. Plenty of economic value generated.

You can continue to be aggressively wrong and watch your comments descend into the grey and get flagged as a result, but I'm out. Constructive debate requires a shared reality and set of facts.

Your boss generate revenue. Revenue !== value

There's nothing wrong with being Person 1. But it's foolish, at best, to keep confusing Person 1 with Person 2. You're willing to commit to that insanity. I am not.

Aggressive? When did stating the obvious become aggressive?