Yes, the article gives IMO a worse explanation for the delays here. > Without deep knowledge of a company’s critical research — which businesses may be relucta

Yes, the article gives IMO a worse explanation for the delays here. > Without deep knowledge of a company’s critical research — which businesses may be reluctant to share, for competitive reasons — it’s difficult for outsiders to evaluate a start-up’s worth. In the presence of ZIRP --> greater fund availability, existing reasons for not going public dominate: not dealing with Sarbanes-Oxley, activist short investors, and other operational headaches of a public company. The other good reason for going public -- getting officers and employees regular liquidity -- is being undercut by increased availability of secondary offering platforms. It is such an expensive pain to run a public company, the only reasons to do it are access to capital and ongoing liquidity for your shareholders. If you can get that another way, why bother?