5 ms·
As much as I'd love to invest I'm glad they're avoiding the short term outlook being publicly traded would demand.
by yellow_postit 9y ago
As much as I'd love to invest I'm glad they're avoiding the short term outlook being publicly traded would demand.
- joshuas 9y agoDoes being publicly traded necessarily mean you focus on the short term nowadays? We've got companies like Snap who issue non voting shares. I imagine SpaceX could offer common shares that have no voting rights, accept all future dilution and require you punch yourself in the head on Tuesdays and they'd still have a pretty decent offering.
- jmtulloss 9y agoYour stock price still gets beat up if you don't meet earnings, which means you can't raise capital as efficiently (or even fairly) if you need to in the future.
- joshuas 9y agoI didn't say you could run a dumpster fire forever, just that you don't have to worry about your short term stock price because shareholders can't do anything about it (vote a new board in and vote you out) You'd make sure your ducks were in a row before any offerings of course.
- xadhominemx 9y agoAnd your employees are underpaid.
- overcast 9y agoBeing publicly traded means you become slave to shareholders. Their profit is ALL that matters.
- gozur88 9y agoWell, yes. That's the entire point of a corporation.
- joshuas 9y agoYou're only a slave to voting shares. We're about to watch this play out with Snap.
- dancole 9y ago"The idea that all of the world should be measured in dollars to stockholders is actually a relatively new idea. It used to be that we thought that businesses had their purpose. Your purpose was to be making newspapers or fountain pens or whatever. And now we act as though the only purpose of a business was to enrich the people who trade it on Wall Street… Of course you’ve got to have profit, of course you’ve got to support your ownership. But that’s not why we’re doing it. We’re doing it because publishing a newspaper is a crucial thing to be doing." ~Andy Barnes Companies use to be temporary, created for the public good (like building bridges) and did not exist to make a profit.
- refurb 9y agoSounds like a great quote, but when exactly were businesses just about "making stuff"? Look at the Hudson Bay company back in the 1600's. That was about profit, not making stuff. And what is this "we act as though the only purpose of a business was to enrich the people who trade it on Wall Street"? No, the purpose is to make profit for shareholders, including the average everyday Joe with a 401k or pension.
- phkahler 9y agoWhy not have non-voting shares that pay dividends? Then the shareholders would be buying a variable annuity that they price based on their belief in management and the company can ignore them. If you're planning to make money on share price increase, you're looking for a greater fool - someone who is willing to buy when you think it's time to sell.
- mrep 9y ago4 letters: amzn
- gozur88 9y agoBeing publicly traded never necessarily meant you focus on short term. If that were actually true you'd never have seen Intel shelling out $15bn for a fab, or Westinghouse designing nuclear reactors.
- InclinedPlane 9y agoBad example. One of those companies went bankrupt recently.
- gozur88 9y agoI realize that, but it doesn't make it a bad example. Certainly the shareholders were taking the long view when they allowed such a massive R&D program to go forward. The fact that it didn't work out is neither here nor there.
- mtgx 9y agoSo then only the bad companies do it, right? I just want that to be clear.
- gozur88 9y agoI'm not sure how you got that from what I wrote. Is Intel a bad company?