> The issue is still the same: what do you do in the second year (or the third), after you've fixed all the low hanging fruit.
Then you destaff the team, collect your tens of millions of dollars, and be happy about a successfully finished project? The problem with going too far down this line of reasoning is that you leave even low-hanging fruit laying around forever.
What you seem to be missing is that "destaffing" a team of a dozen people is really expensive and painful, and people don't generally sign on to jobs where we say "yeah you'll be doing this for two years and then you'll have to find a new role".
Like I've said twice now, you can solve this problem without stupid business practices, and the you're arguing with a straw man. If you have to say "going too far down this line", you're no longer responding to the argument presented, but a bad faith misrepresentation. That's inappropriate on HN.
Then you destaff the team, collect your tens of millions of dollars, and be happy about a successfully finished project? The problem with going too far down this line of reasoning is that you leave even low-hanging fruit laying around forever.