If it seem the coding practices are inappropriately heaping on technical debt then there are two disagreements:
1. It looks like it will loose money in the long term and is therefore a poor decision even from a money stand point. This would create an impression empty-headed-ness.
2. Creating technical debt looks like at way to make a company appear superficially more valuable than it is by delivering a nonviable product whose real cost won't be realized until later (when the technical debt has to be paid). If this corresponds with funding raising, it creates an impression of dishonesty.
Likely as not these are miss-impressions. But they are deeper problems than "I didn't know companies were supposed to make money".
1. It looks like it will loose money in the long term and is therefore a poor decision even from a money stand point. This would create an impression empty-headed-ness.
2. Creating technical debt looks like at way to make a company appear superficially more valuable than it is by delivering a nonviable product whose real cost won't be realized until later (when the technical debt has to be paid). If this corresponds with funding raising, it creates an impression of dishonesty.
Likely as not these are miss-impressions. But they are deeper problems than "I didn't know companies were supposed to make money".