3 ms·
Sometimes you have no choice. There are limits on shareholder counts for private corporations in some countries, including the US. But I agree with you, it's a
by 3pt14159 8y ago
Sometimes you have no choice. There are limits on shareholder counts for private corporations in some countries, including the US. But I agree with you, it's a real problem.
- adventured 8y agoThat's not correct re the US. You don't have to IPO or list your company (eg on the NYSE) publicly due to shareholder count. You can remain private, you have to publish financials publicly (above 1,999 shareholders). https://www.investopedia.com/terms/5/500-shareholder-threshold.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/5/500-shareholder-thresho...
- hn_throwaway_99 8y agoYeah, but at that point you incur many of the costs with little of the benefit, so it works like a de facto push to IPO. Is anyone aware of any companies that have stayed in that "over shareholder threshold but still remained private" boat for any considerable length of time (i.e. greater than a year or 2)?
- vonmoltke 8y agoPublix Supermarkets comes immediately to mind. There are others, if you dig through the Fortune 500. The requirements for such companies are nowhere near as onerous as those required of public companies. They need to file a 10-K and 10-Qs (as necessary), but most other filings are not required. They are also not subject to Sarbanes-Oxley or Dodd-Frank.
- toomuchtodo 8y agoIt should be noted that Publix is one of the largest employee owned companies in the US. Employees own 31% of the firm through an employee share-ownership plan. (The rest of Publix, established in 1930 by George W. Jenkins, is largely owned by the Jenkins family, which still runs the firm.)