3 ms·
What if the investors pay for the due diligence? The candidate company must be forced to be radically transparent while the auditor will be incentivized to prov
by gostsamo 6y ago
What if the investors pay for the due diligence? The candidate company must be forced to be radically transparent while the auditor will be incentivized to provide value to the investor and be liable if there is missing info due to negligence or corruption.
- mchusma 6y agoI think if investors value the third party stamp of approval there are many ways to charge for it. Just because you don't have to pay an ibank doesn't mean you can't pay an ibank.
- gostsamo 6y agoI agree, just the company under consideration will have to provide comparable level of access to information to enable meaningful analysis and this is hard to happen without regulation. The other option is if the company does not cooperate because it is free not to which will turn the IPO into a cat in a bag investment. It will attract the risk-seeking, the stupid, and those with insider information. On the other hand, if the company does not have the marketing cloud and is underfunded, it will have to spend some money to attract the investor's attention which might be as costly as paying a dedicated proxy. It would be interesting to watch.
- sjg007 6y agoI mean is the S1 with SEC approval to list not enough?
- URSpider94 6y agoThis. Any company listing on the exchange will be required to file an S1 as well as quarterly and annual statements. From that point on, in fact, they will not be allowed to provide deeper diligence to privileged investors - that would be insider trading. The point is, if the company is making the shares available directly to the market, then you don't need to convince underwriters to purchase your shares before you go public.