A CTO’s Strategic Playbook: How Evaluating Rare Assets Informs Long-Term Tech Investment Decisions

As a CTO, I’ve learned that technology strategy isn’t just about picking the right tools. It’s about learning how to ask the right questions—especially when the answers aren’t obvious. This hit home for me recently when I found myself reading a forum thread about rare coin valuations. What started as a casual scroll turned into a lightbulb moment: we face the same hard choices in tech every day.

How do we value something we can’t easily measure?
A legacy system with no documentation.
An AI prototype with no production track record.
A “rare” internal tool built by someone who left years ago—but “it just works,” they say.

These aren’t just technical puzzles. They’re strategic decisions under uncertainty. And like those coins—some low-grade, some potentially valuable, many misrepresented—our job is to separate real value from wishful thinking.

1. The CTO’s Dilemma: Valuing the Unverified

We’re constantly asked to assess things with no clear market price. A prototype. A closed-source library. A framework that “sounded great at the conference.” Just like a coin with questionable markings, we face three burning questions:

• Is this rare—or just obscure?

<

• Is this value real, or just a sales pitch?

<

• What will it cost to find out—and is it worth it?

I once inherited a “high-performance” microservice. The former lead swore it scaled to millions of requests. No tests. No metrics. No docs. Just a GitHub repo and a LinkedIn post. I felt like the guy holding a coin he thought was worth $1,400 but couldn’t prove.
Belief isn’t a business case.

Strategic Implication: Build Your Own Grading System

In numismatics, PCGS and NGC add trust. In engineering, we need our own standards. That’s why we built a three-tier verification ladder:

1. Tier 1: Quick Scan (1–2 weeks)
   Check test coverage, dependency freshness, and basic code health. Fast. Cheap. Filters out the obvious no’s.
2. Tier 2: Proof-of-Concept (2–4 weeks)
   Run a real function in isolation. Measure speed, security, and how easy it is to modify. This is where most “rare” ideas fail.
3. Tier 3: Full Audit (6+ weeks)
   Independent team runs benchmarks, threat modeling, compliance checks. Only for assets with real potential.

We won’t spend a dime on Tier 3 without passing Tier 2. Just like you wouldn’t pay $100 to grade a coin you’re 90% sure is common.

2. Budget Allocation: The Grading Dilemma

Grading isn’t free. $30–$100 a coin adds up fast—and there’s no guarantee you’ll like the result. Same with tech. Running a full validation costs time, people, and opportunity cost. You could be building new features instead.

Actionable Framework: The Verification ROI Matrix

We use a simple formula to decide what’s worth verifying:


Verification ROI = (Potential Value * Probability of Success) - (Cost of Verification + Opportunity Cost)


Let’s apply it:

• Legacy API: Could save $150K/year. 40% chance it’s viable. Cost to test: $25K.
  ROI = ($60K) – $25K = $35K net gain. ✅ Go.
• Mystery AI Model: Could add $500K to valuation. 10% chance. Cost: $80K.
  ROI = ($50K) – $80K = $30K loss. ❌ Hard pass.

This stops us from betting on hype. Like the forum member who swore his coin was worth thousands, teams often fall in love with their own assumptions. Data doesn’t care about your feelings.

3. Technology Leadership: Managing Emotional Bias

One of the hardest parts of my job? Saying “no” to something someone loves.
I’ve seen engineers defend 20-year-old systems like they’re family heirlooms. “It works!” they say. But so does a 1986 Toyota with 300K miles. That doesn’t make it a good investment.

The coin thread had a similar moment: owner kept insisting value despite warnings about photo quality, grading costs, and lack of provenance. That’s emotional attachment clouding judgment.

Tactical Playbook: Debiasing Engineering Decisions

We’ve built simple, repeatable practices to keep objectivity alive:

• Blind Reviews: Strip ownership and history. Judge the code, not the coder.
• Third-Party Audits: External architects evaluate legacy systems. They don’t care about “it’s always worked.” They care about risks.
• Red Teams: Assign someone to disprove the value claim. It forces rigor.

For a coin, we demand a documented chain of custody. Same for code. If a system came “from a former contractor” with no git history or CI/CD traces? We treat it as untrusted—until proven.

4. Tech Roadmaps: When to Invest in Preservation vs. Innovation

Not every old thing is worth saving. A 1966 half-dollar might be worth $9 in silver. If it’s damaged or unverifiable? It’s a burden, not an asset. Same with legacy tech.

Strategic Filter: The 3-Year Viability Test

Before we commit to any “rare” asset, we ask three questions:

1. Will this still be maintainable in three years? Can new hires understand it? Are dependencies still supported?

<

2. Does it unlock future capabilities? Can it work with modern tools? Or will it block innovation?
3. Is keeping it cheaper than replacing it? Compare maintenance cost vs. rebuild effort.

If the answer to any is “no,” we sunset it. Just like a coin collector asks: “Is the cost of grading worth the potential upside?”

5. Hiring & Team Alignment: Building Verification Culture

The best engineers I’ve worked with aren’t the ones who build the shiniest prototypes. They’re the ones who question before they build.

We hire for:

<
• Ability to spot red flags (“This looks like a bug, not a feature”)
• Comfort with uncertainty (“We don’t know—but here’s how we’d find out”)
• Clarity in tradeoffs (“Yes, it’s fast. But it’s unmaintainable.”)

When someone says, “This legacy system is a gold mine,” we don’t say “prove it.” We say:
“Show me a three-week test that proves it. Then we’ll decide.”
That’s how you build a culture of evidence, not ego.

6. The CTO’s Checklist: From Coins to Code

Here’s my go-to framework for any unproven asset—code, coin, or concept:

1. Provenance: Who made it? How was it maintained? Is there a record?

<

2. Condition: Is it “heat-damaged”? (Undocumented, broken, unsupported?)
3. Value: What’s the upside? Assume the worst-case.
4. Cost to Verify: How much time, money, and people to test?
5. Alternatives: Is there a simpler, faster way to get the same outcome?
6. Decision: Grade it (invest) or discard it (move on).

Conclusion: The Value is in the Process

Whether it’s a coin worth $1.12 or $1,400, what matters isn’t the price tag. It’s the discipline of evaluation.

• Uncertainty is part of the job. Not everything will have a clear value. That’s normal.

<

• Verification costs money. Always run the numbers before spending.
• Bias kills strategy. Leaders protect decisions from emotion, not feed them.

<

• Culture is your competitive edge. Teams that question beat teams that believe.

The most valuable “rare find” isn’t a coin, a codebase, or a tool.
It’s a team that knows how to assess value in the dark.
And that’s the real job of a technology leader.

Related Resources

You might also find these related articles helpful:

• How Source Code Review for Legal Cases Can Launch Your Career as a Tech Expert Witness in Intellectual Property Disputes – Software at the center of a legal battle? That’s where tech experts like you come in. Lawyers need your skills — and thi…
• How I Turned a Passion for Coin Collecting into a Technical Book: From Idea to O’Reilly Publication – Ever stared at a rare coin and thought, “There’s got to be a better way to verify this?” That’s …
• How I Turned My Coin Collecting Expertise Into a $50,000 Online Course on Teachable – I still remember the first time someone asked me, “How do I know if this coin is worth anything?” I was at a…