Not even referring to the Masterpiece. On the contrary, we have here: … Well, what?
Interested as we all are in the subject, since it is defined still so sloppily, we all look for progress, I started. But stopped, when it turned out … risk appetite is defined in hindsight, with a survived disaster being the appetite threshold. Nice. So you’ll know what your appetite is when it hit you and were lucky enough to survive. If you didn’t survive, you now know you passed the threshold. Same [?] with projects: Only if it fails, do you have to write off the investment. The idea of sunk costs may be an enlightenment..?
Etc.
I believe the CRISC curriculum has other, actually somewhat useful, information on this, and on risk tolerance ..?
Your comments, please.
Plus:
[For 20 points, evaluate the risks, e.g., qua privacy, bird strikes, value development; Barça]