10 ms·

Twilio, Asana to List on Long Term Stock Exchange

270 points by rayshan 5y ago

jimsimmons 5y ago
Wonder who the first exclusive listing is.
- eries 5y ago
  We intentionally do not offer exclusive listings at this time
eries 5y ago
Founder/CEO of LTSE here. Happy to answer questions if anyone wants to know more, AMA
- kn0thing 5y ago
  This is exciting. Who's next to list on LTSE???
  - eries 5y ago
    Stay tuned...
    - aprao 5y ago
      Reddit?
    - bklyn11201 5y ago
      This page (https://ltse.com/platform/equity/ https://ltse.com/platform/equity/) says "Trusted by 32,000 companies". What does that mean?
      - eries 5y ago
        We have a governance platform for private companies, used by a lot of YC and other startups
- atlasunshrugged 5y ago
  I know you're probably here to more specifically talk about this news but I'm curious broadly what you've learned that's surprised you about running a stock exchange that outsiders may not know.
- bberenberg 5y ago
  What should consumer investors expect to be different when interacting with LTSE listed stocks? I am not asking about the LTSE restrictions on the companies, rather about how trading / etc works with these stocks?
  - eries 5y ago
    As of today, investing in LTSE listed stocks is 100% backwards compatible with every existing stock trading platform and broker. You literally will not notice any difference.
- owl_troupe 5y ago
  Do you see benefit corporations as being a natural fit for LTSE? If so, would LTSE ever require companies be organized as b-corps as a condition of listing on LTSE?
  - eries 5y ago
    Yes, I think it's a very natural fit. The first wave of B-corps that went public had a very bad experience, and I think the problem was that they did not have the right financial infrastructure around them to support their vision. We hope to remedy that. So far, we have taken the view that each company has to design its long-term program around its own philosophy and approach. I don't know if it would really work to adopt a one-size-fits-all rule like this, even if I personally liked it. We will have to see how the concept of benefit corporations evolves. So far, it seems that a number of companies that truly exist for the benefit of humanity have chosen not to organize themselves under that framework. As long as this is true, I'd be wary of excluding them from LTSE.
- robert1er 5y ago
  How correlated can we expect the LTSE performance and the stock performance on other exchanges to be?
  - eries 5y ago
    The research is pretty clear that companies run in a long-term way are more profitable, resilient and lead to better returns for investors. I can't speak to which stocks will do better than others, but we built the listing standards to match the actions seen to drive long-term performance.
- toufka 5y ago
  Is there anything a shareholder can do to encourage the LTSE? Or said another way, is there a mechanism for a shareholder to specify which exchange they are buying stock on? And would traffic on the LTSE help the LTSE? Or is most of the support for the LTSE accomplished on the company side, and at listing time?
  - eries 5y ago
    This is a great question. Let me take it in parts. First off, you're right that the most important place for support is via companies. Ultimately, that's what matters. But you'd be surprised how much voice people have in influencing companies. For example, if you're an employee, I can tell you first hand how closely CEO's and executive teams monitor (for example) what gets asked about at all-hands meetings. Shareholders matter too. Companies want to know what their investors think and many of them have whole "investor relations" departments whose job is, in part, to relay investor sentiment to the rest of the company. In terms of trading, yes, you can specify what exchange your shares trade on. Almost every major broker is a member of LTSE and can route orders to the exchange. As the customer, you're in charge of where your orders get routed, and you're welcome to specify a specific venue. Not every broker supports this right in their web UI, although I've heard that Interactive Brokers (IBKR) does. If you've been following the news about controversies such as "pay for order flow" and such, you might make a connection here. Most retail customers don't specify where their order should be routed and as a result, they lend their voice to many of these industry practices. Because LTSE is not focused on maximizing trading volume, things are a little different on our platform. If you route to LTSE, you can be sure that no intermediary is getting paid for your transaction, and LTSE does not take a trading fee either. As to whether traffic on LTSE helps, I think it does lend a little bit of credibility. If you take the time to tell your broker this is what you want, they will probably notice. Thanks for the thoughtful question!
    - KMag 5y ago
      If I specify a particular venue, does Reg NMS still require my order to only be filled if it's within the national best bid-offer (NBBO) range? If not, that would seem to be a big caveat that should be mentioned whenever mentioning that retail inventors can specify a specific venue. (Disclosure: I work on the sell-side, but don't have a Series 7. Certainly, for vanilla orders, Reg NMS requires your broker to route your order for best price. If you're specifying the routing, though, I'll leave it to someone with a Series 7 to explain which Reg NMS protections still apply.)
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- teruakohatu 5y ago
  Is there research showing that public companies focusing on long term performance perform better than companies focusing on short term performance? It is often taken as a given that this is true, despite the many very long term successful public companies.
  - eries 5y ago
    Yes there is much research in this area. Personally, I first got interested in this as a philosophical matter from reading about Toyota and its history (which has been extensively researched) I think it's interesting that you use the word "despite" here, since of course it's those very companies that provide the data for this area of research. I don't have time to pull links to papers right now, but there are some referenced in our (rather old now) whitepaper: https://longtermstockexchange.com/static/principals_for_lt_success_white_paper-52e153e1e0be49bd178f74475f274ef0.pdf https://longtermstockexchange.com/static/principals_for_lt_s... as well as our original application to the SEC: https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/ltse/2019/34-86327.pdf https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/ltse/2019/34-86327.pdf Some of my favorite research shows what happens to pairwise-matched companies where one went public and one stayed private. The effects are totally predictable.
    - eloff 5y ago
      > Some of my favorite research shows what happens to pairwise-matched companies where one went public and one stayed private. The effects are totally predictable. That sounds like an interesting read. How can I find it?
      - eries 5y ago
        I don't have the citation handy, but I'll keep an eye out next time I go through my archives and see if I can dig up a link. It's a fascinating branch of research, imho
- pg_bot 5y ago
  What specific benefit does listing on the LTSE bring for companies? Can't they just operate with a view for the long term and trade on a different exchange? (I'm thinking about Amazon/Berkshire Hathaway here)
  - tedunangst 5y ago
    Rephrased: What specific benefit does printing "gluten free" on a can of tuna bring?
    - slim 5y ago
      Plus network effect in the case of LTSE. Which is positive.
- oxymoran 5y ago
  No question but I love the idea. I was just explaining to my wife about how I never want to work at a publicly traded company because their only goal is maximizing shareholder value in the short term.
  - eries 5y ago
    Thank you!
  - acchow 5y ago
    > their only goal is maximizing shareholder value in the short term. What about Amazon that operated on losses for many consecutive years?
    - CameronNemo 5y ago
      Profit is not directly linked to shareholder value. E.g. an expanding business that is operating at a loss could end up benefiting the shareholders (through valuation) if there is an expectation of future profitability.
      - repsilat 5y ago
        The grandparent quoted the line >> their only goal is maximizing shareholder value in the short term and mentioned Amazon making a loss. You're right that Amazon could credibly be described as "maximizing shareholder value", but I think the question of whether they maximize shareholder value in the short term is more subtle. You could do some jiujitsu and say "long-term value maximization is equivalent to short-term value maximization under reasonable assumptions", but I think the discussion upthread was about a more prosaic concept of short-termism that is related to profits. They wouldn't have qualified their statement with "in the short term" if they'd meant "expected NPV" :-).
        CameronNemo 5y ago
        But here is the catch: for long term expected profits to affect short term value, the market has to be convinced of it. Actual long term performance requires more than PR, pitching, and posturing. It requires actually following through and reaching the expected profits.
- wyxuan 5y ago
  Any interest in allowing shares on the LTSE to trade directly on crypto exchanges?
  - eries 5y ago
    If/when the regulatory framework exists to do this in a compliant way, we would be open to it
- lwb 5y ago
  Is it possible to invest in the LTSE itself?
  - eries 5y ago
    We are currently a private tech company, so only accredited investors have been able to invest so far. We hope to list publicly one day.
    - jppope 5y ago
      Didn't the SEC just change that?
      - eries 5y ago
        Not that I’m aware of!
        pabl8k 5y ago
        The change the parent is probably thinking of is that you could offer up to $5 million as a Reg Crowdfunding round (vs the previous cap of $1 million) if you wanted to offer non-accredited investors a way to invest while you are still a private company. Wefunder or Republic or another such service would create a special purpose LLC to be the shareholder of record (or SAFE/noteholder or whatever) on your cap table.
        kenneth 5y ago
        That's not exactly how it works, but close in spirit. When you invest in Republic, you are entering into a contract called a CrowdSAFE. It's a convertible instrument much like a SAFE, but instead of converting into the next priced funding round into stock, it converts in a liquidity event directly into stock (or the cash equivalent if an acquisition for cash). There is no intermediary SPV. What you're describing however is the way AngelList works. The reason for this is mainly because the Reg CF terms prohibit crowdfunding investment vehicles (such as funds or SPVs). (Source: I am former CSO of Republic)
- liamcardenas 5y ago
  Last time I read up on LTSE I noticed that the exchange doesn’t operate differently than a traditional stock exchange. Instead the companies in LTSE adopt specific language in their bylaws that orients them toward the long-term. Is this a correct understanding? If you aren’t implementing any exchange-level mechanisms, why does this need to be an exchange at all? Why not just create a template for corporate bylaws that you can certify, like a B-Corp? An LT-Corp, if you will.
  - jeofken 5y ago
    How would you make money of templates? With this model, you can profit on the value of every trade. I assume the exchange makes more when people invest more.
    - xwdv 5y ago
      Why would I route orders through this exchange?
      - eries 5y ago
        LTSE uses something called the Very Simple Market, which has some benefits over the legacy platforms. A brief summary is here: https://ltse.com/blog/introducing-the-long-term-stock-exchanges-very-simple-market/ https://ltse.com/blog/introducing-the-long-term-stock-exchan...
    - lmm 5y ago
      An exchange usually makes more when people trade more ("we're in the moving business, not the storage business") and stocks are more volatile, so from one angle it would seem like the very worst place possible to try to encourage long-termism.
      - eries 5y ago
        LTSE has a different business model, so hopefully things will turn out differently
    - 5y ago
- subroutine 5y ago
  What specific policies (not principles) will most people find to be the biggest difference between LTSE and NYSE? For example, if someone purchases shares through LTSE is there a minimum number of days that must elapse before the shares can be sold? Is there a policy regarding exactly how executive compensation should align with long-term success, or is the policy just that the company needs to publish such a document? Etc.
  - eries 5y ago
    LTSE work through what are called "principles-based listing standards" which require every listed company to adopt (and publish) a concrete policy that shows how they are committing to each specific principle. LTSE has a regulatory team that acts as a certifying agency. So while we don't have a one-size-fits-all policy that every company must enact on, for example, executive comp, they do have to make real, concrete commitments in that area in order to be listed. In terms of trading, we don't currently have any rules of the sort you mention. Under today's regulatory framework, this would be hard (but not impossible) to do. We hope to see more work in this area, but nothing to announce at this time.
- zackbloom 5y ago
  The obvious way of ensuring long-term performance is to slow down the buy/sell process. For example, the company could offer a discount on its stock for anyone who agrees to hold it for six months. This seems like a more practical solution than a whole bunch of policy nods which, as far as I can tell, can't actually prevent someone from day trading the stock based on short-term performance. Am I totally off base?
  - eries 5y ago
    Nope, that's a very good idea. I personally don't think long-term investors should have to pay the same price to buy stock as speculators. But in finance this is still considered a very radical notion, so I think it will be some time before we see this idea adopted
    - JumpCrisscross 5y ago
      Has the LTSE considered paying dividends based on holding time?
      - eries 5y ago
        Yes, I think that’s something companies may consider eventually.
      - tedunangst 5y ago
        Can you backdate dividends? Each quarter, pick a random date 1-2 months back as the date of record.
        _delirium 5y ago
        Both NYSE and Nasdaq rules require the record date to be announced at least 10 days in advance, so a mainstream U.S.-listed company can't backdate it. Whether it'd pass SEC muster if we take exchange rules out of the picture, I don't know.
  - gregwebs 5y ago
- rawtxapp 5y ago
  This is an awesome idea! I'm curious as to specific differences wrt to other exchanges, your website doesn't really do a direct comparison. For example, do you require holders to hold a certain amount of time before being able to sell, are there limits around frequency of trading, how do you make money, etc. Or is it more around including companies that think long term? In which case, I think that's also doable on normal exchanges (for example, Amazon is famous for long term thinking and has done well on normal exchanges too).
  - eries 5y ago
    Thanks! The SEC's rules around trading (today) really prohibit a lot of the "obvious" ideas people have had about how to slow down trading. We have some stuff in the works here, but it won't be public for a while. That said, we have adopted a construct that we call the "Very Simple Market" that eliminates a number of trading "features" such as hidden liquidity. We think this makes it a more conducive environment for the longest-term investors to trade. We also have a business model that is much more aligned with the long-term investors and companies than most incumbents. We don't seek to maximize our trading volume, so that requires us to make money by helping our customers run their businesses better. As we say in SV, if you're not the customer, you're the product. This applies to issuers as well. On your latter point, you've got it right. We don't think we have an exclusive on good ideas, and there's definitely examples where talented founders have found ways to build for the long-term in spite of the existing market structures. But when was the last time you heard a CEO say that they were able to think long-term _because_ of the markets in stead of in spite? That to me is a key difference
    - petr_tik 5y ago
      To which extend do you think market fragmentation (as a result of reg NMS) is part of the problem? If i understand your reference to "hidden liquidity" correctly, you have simple order types and when compared to other venues. Wouldn't it be better for price discovery, if all US equities were traded in one continuous limit order book instead of across a dozen venues, each with its own funky order types and quirks? if you agree, i cannot help but think about this xkcd https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/
- throwawaysea 5y ago
  I have seen that some exchanges like NASDAQ are considering adding social justice elements into their requirements for listed companies. For instance, NASDAQ had submitted a proposal to force diversity of boards on companies (https://www.nasdaq.com/press-release/nasdaq-to-advance-diversity-through-new-proposed-listing-requirements-2020-12-01 https://www.nasdaq.com/press-release/nasdaq-to-advance-diver...). Personally I do not like the mission creep and politicization of institutions in general, and am wondering where/how you draw the line on what you will require of companies. Your listing principles page (https://longtermstockexchange.com/listings/principles/ https://longtermstockexchange.com/listings/principles/) is interesting in that there's a lot I agree with (like compensation policy) but then some other principles (like "The company’s approach to diversity and inclusion" or "The company’s impact on the environment and its community") are vague enough that I am not sure what it implies. Is it fair to consider LTSE a "progressive" financial institution?
  - eries 5y ago
    Our reforms are fundamentally market-based. We work with companies to develop policies that commit them to the values that they think ensure their ability to pursue their mission long-term. It's not one-size-fits-all and ultimately investors will judge the results. I think you'll see a diversity of companies and views on the exchange, just as you see a diversity of views among our own investors and employees.
- joecool1029 5y ago
  Previous AMA here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19881673 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19881673 Quick skim and comparing with the OP article, the only concrete takeaway I get is shareholders that hold shares longer potentially have more voting power in your system? Good for founders, potentially (and ironically) bad for the company in the longterm. I don't have to labor the point on this site that a few successful exits had founder CEO's that needed to be removed by investors/shareholders.
  - eries 5y ago
    Thanks for linking to the previous AMA from when our rules were originally approved. There's actually also one from last year when we began trading stocks, but I don't quite know how to look up the URL right now - while also typing these answers. Although an earlier version of our proposal did have a voting-rights mechanism, as part of a one-size-fits-all prescription, we ultimately decided against it. Personally, I was hoping to offer "long-term voting" as a principled compromise between standard governance and dual-class shares. But in the interim, dual-class shares have basically won in the market. I'm still hopeful as an industry we will be able to find better solutions in the future
  - DennisP 5y ago
    Some, but there are also some very successful startups still run by their founders, like Tesla and (until recently) Amazon. Then there's Apple, which did much better after bringing the founder back. (I've read that on average, companies run by founders tend to do better over the long term. I'm having trouble pulling up the source though; best I can find right now is the book 100 Baggers, quoting a study saying "there was often a large shareholder or an entrepreneurial founder involved.")
- cft 5y ago
  The main problem with the normal stock exchanges in my opinion is the lack of meaningful long term shorts. Betting up and down are highly asymmetric in cost. Meaningful long term shorts are needed to prevent bubbles. Is there such mechanism in the LTSE?
- ffggvv 5y ago
  no question but congrats! remember when i first herad about LTSE, it sounded a bit unrealistic but cool to see its being adopted.
  - eries 5y ago
    thanks!
- vonsydov 5y ago
  Pretty sweet man congratulations on the launch. This is really nice!
- zeckalpha 5y ago
  Does the similar name to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-Term_Capital_Management https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-Term_Capital_Management indicate investors have short-term memory?
- vishnugupta 5y ago
  Can international retail investors buy stocks from/on LTSE? If not, do you plan to allow that anytime soon? Thanks!
  - dannyw 5y ago
    Yes.
- thatthatis 5y ago
  What’s the deal with captable.io transitioning from “a public service for every startup to safeguard their equity from day one” to basically the same price model as carta? Why weren’t legacy companies given grandfathered pricing?
- jsfeit81 5y ago
  Hi Eric - don’t know what AMA means (sorry), but I would like to talk about this with you / your team. I also sent you a note via your website and Twitter. Bottom line is that coverage of your recent announcement talks about dual listing. I’m wondering if you’d be equipped to do a primary. Thanks! Jonathon Feit Jonathon.Feit@beyondlucid.com
  - jschulenklopper 5y ago
    AMA: Ask Me Anything
Mat_Sherman 5y ago
What types of companies are able to list on LTSE?
- jmholla 5y ago
  The article says the following: > To list on LTSE in August, Twilio and Asana are agreeing to a slate of commitments such as aligning executive and board compensation with long-term performance; taking customers and employees into account; and explaining how the company’s board oversees its long-term strategy. These commitments must be concrete policies that can be monitored by LTSE.
KaoruAoiShiho 5y ago
LTSE is a sorely needed financial innovation but all the stuff around social impact is a new burden I think... Not everyone's going to be interested in that, oh well.
- eries 5y ago
  It's definitely not for everybody!
bedhead 5y ago
For people who value virtue signaling more than liquidity.
- eries 5y ago
  I get that you're just being snarky here, but I've often wondered about comments like this. When did being virtuous become an insult? I actually think the ancient view of virtue is due for a bit of a comeback. Increasingly, investors and employees both want to know which companies are actually purpose- and mission-driven and which ones are not. I don't see the harm in giving them a way to signal that, as long as it's real. I also don't understand the "liquidity" part of your comment either. LTSE is a participant in something called the National Market System which guarantees that every stock listed on every National Securities Exchange has the exact same level of access to liquidity.
  - anonymouse008 5y ago
    From what I’ve been able to gather, Liquidity just means being able to get out of a bad decision at little to no cost. Basically no one wants to hold risk anymore, but still have growth… which is the fundamental flaw in the markets that continues to rear its ugly head in exotic derivatives
    - epgui 5y ago
      Liquidity only eliminates the type of risk that is associated with liquidity. Having less liquidity risk does not in any way mean you're more likely to lose money in general. Less liquidity means there's a larger bid-ask spread: if you're in a rush to either buy or sell, there's a chance you'll pay a premium for a quick trade. If you're not in a rush, you probably won't pay this premium at all.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
    - hogFeast 5y ago
endisneigh 5y ago
I can’t read the full article but: > To list on LTSE in August, Twilio and Asana are agreeing to a slate of commitments such as aligning executive and board compensation with long-term performance; taking customers and employees into account; and explaining how the company’s board oversees its long-term strategy. These commitments must be concrete policies that can be monitored by LTSE. If such agreements are broken what’s the punishment, other than presumably being dislisted? If there are none it seems like an empty platitude given that you can already buy both on the “regular” stock exchange. Is daytrading prohibited? If not seems like it’s still bound by the same short term nonsense. I’d be impressed if you can only buy and sell on the LTSE once a year. Money being put where the mouth is and all that.
- eries 5y ago
  The requirements are embodied in the listing standards of the exchange, and have enforcement mechanisms equivalent to other listing standards. The SEC takes this stuff quite seriously - as they should - so instances of companies violating listing standards are thankfully pretty rare. I expect the same thing here. In terms of the requirements on trading that you mention, a requirement like that would violate current SEC rules about trading. But remember that companies are the metaphorical "central bank" of their own currency and can do all kinds of things that would reward those investors who truly are committed for the long-term. We don't have anything to announce in this area at this time, but I hope to be able to say more some day.
  - joecool1029 5y ago
    I do like that you explained why this is the case and didn't just provide a non-answer to it. Are you lobbying to get these sorts of rules changed? (last time the question came up: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19886420 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19886420 )
    - eries 5y ago
      It's not quite a simple as the word "lobbying" implies. But we are in active conversations with a lot of the other stakeholders on both the buy side and sell side to see if we can find ways to bring some flavor of this to the markets. But I really can't be more specific because we don't have anything concrete to report - yet. I will say that I expect companies will also have opportunities to innovate in this area when it comes to their own stock, though I do think it will take a while as the industry is relatively conservative about things like this.
jonplackett 5y ago
Twilio’s great but what does everyone think of their long term prospects? Pretty much every automatically sent text message / WhatsApp is probably sent from Twillo already. What is next for them?
- nbclark 5y ago
  They seem to be expanding successfully into video and email. I'd expect the next big lift to be the sequencing of those different mediums.
- dhritzkiv 5y ago
  Sending SMSes is their core offering, for sure, but I think that's selling them short. They also offer programmable text+voice, chat rooms, video chat etc. Lots of useful stuff for building/bootstrapping your own platforms. Their other product (through acquisition) is SendGrid, for transactional emails. I imagine what's next is more of the same: solutions to do with different ways of communicating. Perhaps no-code/low-code variants to many of their offerings, much like what Stripe is doing (powerful technical layer, but also very business friendly introductory solutions)
- skinnymuch 5y ago
  Their peak stock price was like 20% higher than right now. With a lot of similar cloud companies hitting all time highs, Twilio’s market cap would exceed $75B if they hit all time high again. Acquisitions can do quite a bit. That’s how Salesforce runs :). Twilio bought Segment for $3.2 in stock.
- tootie 5y ago
  Asana is the shocker for me. I've seen many, many enterprises big and small and barely a handful were running Asana. And none of them liked it.
  - whiddershins 5y ago
    I love it. We’ve used it for years.
  - 5y ago
JumpCrisscross 5y ago
It’s hard to make the claim that public markets overly prioritise the short term with the last weeks’ string of EV start-ups IPOs / SPAC mergers and ExxonMobile Board manoeuvre. At the same time, founder supervoting is falling out of favor. This neatly backdoors to the same result—founders (and institutional investors, who can invest through a long-holding front end and then allocate exposure to that on the back end) gaining outsized influence over individual investors (who aren’t coördinated) and hedge funds. Seems like a lot of collateral damage.
- BeFlatXIII 5y ago
  Would you consider founders and institutional investors having influence that hedge funds will not have to be a good, bad, or neutral arrangement?
rossmohax 5y ago
Is it why Asana CEO buys 160000 shares every day, pumping up price?
- skinnymuch 5y ago
  Is there any citation for this? Asana’s stock has been absolutely bananas recently.
  - rossmohax 5y ago
    Scroll to "Insider trading" section at the bottom https://finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=asan https://finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=asan
    - skinnymuch 5y ago
      Oh man. Wish I had known this earlier. Maybe I would’ve jumped on the bandwagon. Moskovitz has to be worth between $10-30B with Facebook nearing a trillion market cap. $7.5-$10M daily stock purchases is nothing for him. He could do it for 60 total days without affecting him financially at all. I have to check the comps, but Monday.com was valued more than Asana just like two weeks ago and far more before the pumping began. How much better could Monday.com’s financials be
    - willcipriano 5y ago
      Never used finviz before, but I found a simpler link: https://finviz.com/insidertrading.ashx?oc=1549917&tc=1&b=2 https://finviz.com/insidertrading.ashx?oc=1549917&tc=1&b=2
- mistrial9 5y ago
  I find the name Asana for a company, to be offensive as cultural appropriation. Secondly, I am absolutely opposed to the Surveillance Capitalism model, which these people have driven relentlessly. This combination feels dystopian.
neonate 5y ago
https://archive.is/KzTDN https://archive.is/KzTDN
yellow_lead 5y ago
> The CEOs of both companies, which also are listed on the New York Stock Exchange, were early investors in LTSE with financial stakes of less than 1.5%. So the CEOs of Twilio and Asana invested in this exchange then convinced their board to list on it. I'm sure they're not just interested for personal gain though.
- andreareina 5y ago
  > To list on LTSE in August, Twilio and Asana are agreeing to a slate of commitments such as aligning executive and board compensation with long-term performance; taking customers and employees into account; and explaining how the company’s board oversees its long-term strategy. These commitments must be concrete policies that can be monitored by LTSE. Sounds like a good thing.
sngz 5y ago
i remember reading about asana on here years ago. wasn't it supposed to be the thing that saved us from JIRA but ended up turning into the very thing everyone hated about JIRA?
alberth 5y ago
ELI5 Can someone provide the simple overview of (a) how LTSE is different, (b) what the listed company pro/cons are and (c) what are the investor pro/cons
antman 5y ago
Never heard of a long term stack exchange. Is this a US thing against HFTs?

270 points by rayshan 5y ago

jimsimmons 5y ago

Wonder who the first exclusive listing is.

eries 5y ago
We intentionally do not offer exclusive listings at this time

eries 5y ago

Founder/CEO of LTSE here. Happy to answer questions if anyone wants to know more, AMA

kn0thing 5y ago
This is exciting. Who's next to list on LTSE???
- eries 5y ago
  Stay tuned...
  - aprao 5y ago
    Reddit?
  - bklyn11201 5y ago
    This page (https://ltse.com/platform/equity/ https://ltse.com/platform/equity/) says "Trusted by 32,000 companies". What does that mean?
    - eries 5y ago
      We have a governance platform for private companies, used by a lot of YC and other startups
atlasunshrugged 5y ago
I know you're probably here to more specifically talk about this news but I'm curious broadly what you've learned that's surprised you about running a stock exchange that outsiders may not know.
bberenberg 5y ago
What should consumer investors expect to be different when interacting with LTSE listed stocks? I am not asking about the LTSE restrictions on the companies, rather about how trading / etc works with these stocks?
- eries 5y ago
  As of today, investing in LTSE listed stocks is 100% backwards compatible with every existing stock trading platform and broker. You literally will not notice any difference.
owl_troupe 5y ago
Do you see benefit corporations as being a natural fit for LTSE? If so, would LTSE ever require companies be organized as b-corps as a condition of listing on LTSE?
- eries 5y ago
  Yes, I think it's a very natural fit. The first wave of B-corps that went public had a very bad experience, and I think the problem was that they did not have the right financial infrastructure around them to support their vision. We hope to remedy that. So far, we have taken the view that each company has to design its long-term program around its own philosophy and approach. I don't know if it would really work to adopt a one-size-fits-all rule like this, even if I personally liked it. We will have to see how the concept of benefit corporations evolves. So far, it seems that a number of companies that truly exist for the benefit of humanity have chosen not to organize themselves under that framework. As long as this is true, I'd be wary of excluding them from LTSE.
robert1er 5y ago
How correlated can we expect the LTSE performance and the stock performance on other exchanges to be?
- eries 5y ago
  The research is pretty clear that companies run in a long-term way are more profitable, resilient and lead to better returns for investors. I can't speak to which stocks will do better than others, but we built the listing standards to match the actions seen to drive long-term performance.
toufka 5y ago
Is there anything a shareholder can do to encourage the LTSE? Or said another way, is there a mechanism for a shareholder to specify which exchange they are buying stock on? And would traffic on the LTSE help the LTSE? Or is most of the support for the LTSE accomplished on the company side, and at listing time?
- eries 5y ago
  This is a great question. Let me take it in parts. First off, you're right that the most important place for support is via companies. Ultimately, that's what matters. But you'd be surprised how much voice people have in influencing companies. For example, if you're an employee, I can tell you first hand how closely CEO's and executive teams monitor (for example) what gets asked about at all-hands meetings. Shareholders matter too. Companies want to know what their investors think and many of them have whole "investor relations" departments whose job is, in part, to relay investor sentiment to the rest of the company. In terms of trading, yes, you can specify what exchange your shares trade on. Almost every major broker is a member of LTSE and can route orders to the exchange. As the customer, you're in charge of where your orders get routed, and you're welcome to specify a specific venue. Not every broker supports this right in their web UI, although I've heard that Interactive Brokers (IBKR) does. If you've been following the news about controversies such as "pay for order flow" and such, you might make a connection here. Most retail customers don't specify where their order should be routed and as a result, they lend their voice to many of these industry practices. Because LTSE is not focused on maximizing trading volume, things are a little different on our platform. If you route to LTSE, you can be sure that no intermediary is getting paid for your transaction, and LTSE does not take a trading fee either. As to whether traffic on LTSE helps, I think it does lend a little bit of credibility. If you take the time to tell your broker this is what you want, they will probably notice. Thanks for the thoughtful question!
  - KMag 5y ago
    If I specify a particular venue, does Reg NMS still require my order to only be filled if it's within the national best bid-offer (NBBO) range? If not, that would seem to be a big caveat that should be mentioned whenever mentioning that retail inventors can specify a specific venue. (Disclosure: I work on the sell-side, but don't have a Series 7. Certainly, for vanilla orders, Reg NMS requires your broker to route your order for best price. If you're specifying the routing, though, I'll leave it to someone with a Series 7 to explain which Reg NMS protections still apply.)
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
teruakohatu 5y ago
Is there research showing that public companies focusing on long term performance perform better than companies focusing on short term performance? It is often taken as a given that this is true, despite the many very long term successful public companies.
- eries 5y ago
  Yes there is much research in this area. Personally, I first got interested in this as a philosophical matter from reading about Toyota and its history (which has been extensively researched) I think it's interesting that you use the word "despite" here, since of course it's those very companies that provide the data for this area of research. I don't have time to pull links to papers right now, but there are some referenced in our (rather old now) whitepaper: https://longtermstockexchange.com/static/principals_for_lt_success_white_paper-52e153e1e0be49bd178f74475f274ef0.pdf https://longtermstockexchange.com/static/principals_for_lt_s... as well as our original application to the SEC: https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/ltse/2019/34-86327.pdf https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/ltse/2019/34-86327.pdf Some of my favorite research shows what happens to pairwise-matched companies where one went public and one stayed private. The effects are totally predictable.
  - eloff 5y ago
    > Some of my favorite research shows what happens to pairwise-matched companies where one went public and one stayed private. The effects are totally predictable. That sounds like an interesting read. How can I find it?
    - eries 5y ago
      I don't have the citation handy, but I'll keep an eye out next time I go through my archives and see if I can dig up a link. It's a fascinating branch of research, imho
pg_bot 5y ago
What specific benefit does listing on the LTSE bring for companies? Can't they just operate with a view for the long term and trade on a different exchange? (I'm thinking about Amazon/Berkshire Hathaway here)
- tedunangst 5y ago
  Rephrased: What specific benefit does printing "gluten free" on a can of tuna bring?
  - slim 5y ago
    Plus network effect in the case of LTSE. Which is positive.
oxymoran 5y ago
No question but I love the idea. I was just explaining to my wife about how I never want to work at a publicly traded company because their only goal is maximizing shareholder value in the short term.
- eries 5y ago
  Thank you!
- acchow 5y ago
  > their only goal is maximizing shareholder value in the short term. What about Amazon that operated on losses for many consecutive years?
  - CameronNemo 5y ago
    Profit is not directly linked to shareholder value. E.g. an expanding business that is operating at a loss could end up benefiting the shareholders (through valuation) if there is an expectation of future profitability.
    - repsilat 5y ago
      The grandparent quoted the line >> their only goal is maximizing shareholder value in the short term and mentioned Amazon making a loss. You're right that Amazon could credibly be described as "maximizing shareholder value", but I think the question of whether they maximize shareholder value in the short term is more subtle. You could do some jiujitsu and say "long-term value maximization is equivalent to short-term value maximization under reasonable assumptions", but I think the discussion upthread was about a more prosaic concept of short-termism that is related to profits. They wouldn't have qualified their statement with "in the short term" if they'd meant "expected NPV" :-).
      - CameronNemo 5y ago
        But here is the catch: for long term expected profits to affect short term value, the market has to be convinced of it. Actual long term performance requires more than PR, pitching, and posturing. It requires actually following through and reaching the expected profits.
wyxuan 5y ago
Any interest in allowing shares on the LTSE to trade directly on crypto exchanges?
- eries 5y ago
  If/when the regulatory framework exists to do this in a compliant way, we would be open to it
lwb 5y ago
Is it possible to invest in the LTSE itself?
- eries 5y ago
  We are currently a private tech company, so only accredited investors have been able to invest so far. We hope to list publicly one day.
  - jppope 5y ago
    Didn't the SEC just change that?
    - eries 5y ago
      Not that I’m aware of!
      - pabl8k 5y ago
        The change the parent is probably thinking of is that you could offer up to $5 million as a Reg Crowdfunding round (vs the previous cap of $1 million) if you wanted to offer non-accredited investors a way to invest while you are still a private company. Wefunder or Republic or another such service would create a special purpose LLC to be the shareholder of record (or SAFE/noteholder or whatever) on your cap table.
        kenneth 5y ago
        That's not exactly how it works, but close in spirit. When you invest in Republic, you are entering into a contract called a CrowdSAFE. It's a convertible instrument much like a SAFE, but instead of converting into the next priced funding round into stock, it converts in a liquidity event directly into stock (or the cash equivalent if an acquisition for cash). There is no intermediary SPV. What you're describing however is the way AngelList works. The reason for this is mainly because the Reg CF terms prohibit crowdfunding investment vehicles (such as funds or SPVs). (Source: I am former CSO of Republic)
liamcardenas 5y ago
Last time I read up on LTSE I noticed that the exchange doesn’t operate differently than a traditional stock exchange. Instead the companies in LTSE adopt specific language in their bylaws that orients them toward the long-term. Is this a correct understanding? If you aren’t implementing any exchange-level mechanisms, why does this need to be an exchange at all? Why not just create a template for corporate bylaws that you can certify, like a B-Corp? An LT-Corp, if you will.
- jeofken 5y ago
  How would you make money of templates? With this model, you can profit on the value of every trade. I assume the exchange makes more when people invest more.
  - xwdv 5y ago
    Why would I route orders through this exchange?
    - eries 5y ago
      LTSE uses something called the Very Simple Market, which has some benefits over the legacy platforms. A brief summary is here: https://ltse.com/blog/introducing-the-long-term-stock-exchanges-very-simple-market/ https://ltse.com/blog/introducing-the-long-term-stock-exchan...
  - lmm 5y ago
    An exchange usually makes more when people trade more ("we're in the moving business, not the storage business") and stocks are more volatile, so from one angle it would seem like the very worst place possible to try to encourage long-termism.
    - eries 5y ago
      LTSE has a different business model, so hopefully things will turn out differently
  - 5y ago
subroutine 5y ago
What specific policies (not principles) will most people find to be the biggest difference between LTSE and NYSE? For example, if someone purchases shares through LTSE is there a minimum number of days that must elapse before the shares can be sold? Is there a policy regarding exactly how executive compensation should align with long-term success, or is the policy just that the company needs to publish such a document? Etc.
- eries 5y ago
  LTSE work through what are called "principles-based listing standards" which require every listed company to adopt (and publish) a concrete policy that shows how they are committing to each specific principle. LTSE has a regulatory team that acts as a certifying agency. So while we don't have a one-size-fits-all policy that every company must enact on, for example, executive comp, they do have to make real, concrete commitments in that area in order to be listed. In terms of trading, we don't currently have any rules of the sort you mention. Under today's regulatory framework, this would be hard (but not impossible) to do. We hope to see more work in this area, but nothing to announce at this time.
zackbloom 5y ago
The obvious way of ensuring long-term performance is to slow down the buy/sell process. For example, the company could offer a discount on its stock for anyone who agrees to hold it for six months. This seems like a more practical solution than a whole bunch of policy nods which, as far as I can tell, can't actually prevent someone from day trading the stock based on short-term performance. Am I totally off base?
- eries 5y ago
  Nope, that's a very good idea. I personally don't think long-term investors should have to pay the same price to buy stock as speculators. But in finance this is still considered a very radical notion, so I think it will be some time before we see this idea adopted
  - JumpCrisscross 5y ago
    Has the LTSE considered paying dividends based on holding time?
    - eries 5y ago
      Yes, I think that’s something companies may consider eventually.
    - tedunangst 5y ago
      Can you backdate dividends? Each quarter, pick a random date 1-2 months back as the date of record.
      - _delirium 5y ago
        Both NYSE and Nasdaq rules require the record date to be announced at least 10 days in advance, so a mainstream U.S.-listed company can't backdate it. Whether it'd pass SEC muster if we take exchange rules out of the picture, I don't know.
- gregwebs 5y ago
rawtxapp 5y ago
This is an awesome idea! I'm curious as to specific differences wrt to other exchanges, your website doesn't really do a direct comparison. For example, do you require holders to hold a certain amount of time before being able to sell, are there limits around frequency of trading, how do you make money, etc. Or is it more around including companies that think long term? In which case, I think that's also doable on normal exchanges (for example, Amazon is famous for long term thinking and has done well on normal exchanges too).
- eries 5y ago
  Thanks! The SEC's rules around trading (today) really prohibit a lot of the "obvious" ideas people have had about how to slow down trading. We have some stuff in the works here, but it won't be public for a while. That said, we have adopted a construct that we call the "Very Simple Market" that eliminates a number of trading "features" such as hidden liquidity. We think this makes it a more conducive environment for the longest-term investors to trade. We also have a business model that is much more aligned with the long-term investors and companies than most incumbents. We don't seek to maximize our trading volume, so that requires us to make money by helping our customers run their businesses better. As we say in SV, if you're not the customer, you're the product. This applies to issuers as well. On your latter point, you've got it right. We don't think we have an exclusive on good ideas, and there's definitely examples where talented founders have found ways to build for the long-term in spite of the existing market structures. But when was the last time you heard a CEO say that they were able to think long-term _because_ of the markets in stead of in spite? That to me is a key difference
  - petr_tik 5y ago
    To which extend do you think market fragmentation (as a result of reg NMS) is part of the problem? If i understand your reference to "hidden liquidity" correctly, you have simple order types and when compared to other venues. Wouldn't it be better for price discovery, if all US equities were traded in one continuous limit order book instead of across a dozen venues, each with its own funky order types and quirks? if you agree, i cannot help but think about this xkcd https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/
throwawaysea 5y ago
I have seen that some exchanges like NASDAQ are considering adding social justice elements into their requirements for listed companies. For instance, NASDAQ had submitted a proposal to force diversity of boards on companies (https://www.nasdaq.com/press-release/nasdaq-to-advance-diversity-through-new-proposed-listing-requirements-2020-12-01 https://www.nasdaq.com/press-release/nasdaq-to-advance-diver...). Personally I do not like the mission creep and politicization of institutions in general, and am wondering where/how you draw the line on what you will require of companies. Your listing principles page (https://longtermstockexchange.com/listings/principles/ https://longtermstockexchange.com/listings/principles/) is interesting in that there's a lot I agree with (like compensation policy) but then some other principles (like "The company’s approach to diversity and inclusion" or "The company’s impact on the environment and its community") are vague enough that I am not sure what it implies. Is it fair to consider LTSE a "progressive" financial institution?
- eries 5y ago
  Our reforms are fundamentally market-based. We work with companies to develop policies that commit them to the values that they think ensure their ability to pursue their mission long-term. It's not one-size-fits-all and ultimately investors will judge the results. I think you'll see a diversity of companies and views on the exchange, just as you see a diversity of views among our own investors and employees.
joecool1029 5y ago
Previous AMA here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19881673 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19881673 Quick skim and comparing with the OP article, the only concrete takeaway I get is shareholders that hold shares longer potentially have more voting power in your system? Good for founders, potentially (and ironically) bad for the company in the longterm. I don't have to labor the point on this site that a few successful exits had founder CEO's that needed to be removed by investors/shareholders.
- eries 5y ago
  Thanks for linking to the previous AMA from when our rules were originally approved. There's actually also one from last year when we began trading stocks, but I don't quite know how to look up the URL right now - while also typing these answers. Although an earlier version of our proposal did have a voting-rights mechanism, as part of a one-size-fits-all prescription, we ultimately decided against it. Personally, I was hoping to offer "long-term voting" as a principled compromise between standard governance and dual-class shares. But in the interim, dual-class shares have basically won in the market. I'm still hopeful as an industry we will be able to find better solutions in the future
- DennisP 5y ago
  Some, but there are also some very successful startups still run by their founders, like Tesla and (until recently) Amazon. Then there's Apple, which did much better after bringing the founder back. (I've read that on average, companies run by founders tend to do better over the long term. I'm having trouble pulling up the source though; best I can find right now is the book 100 Baggers, quoting a study saying "there was often a large shareholder or an entrepreneurial founder involved.")
cft 5y ago
The main problem with the normal stock exchanges in my opinion is the lack of meaningful long term shorts. Betting up and down are highly asymmetric in cost. Meaningful long term shorts are needed to prevent bubbles. Is there such mechanism in the LTSE?
ffggvv 5y ago
no question but congrats! remember when i first herad about LTSE, it sounded a bit unrealistic but cool to see its being adopted.
- eries 5y ago
  thanks!
vonsydov 5y ago
Pretty sweet man congratulations on the launch. This is really nice!
zeckalpha 5y ago
Does the similar name to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-Term_Capital_Management https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-Term_Capital_Management indicate investors have short-term memory?
vishnugupta 5y ago
Can international retail investors buy stocks from/on LTSE? If not, do you plan to allow that anytime soon? Thanks!
- dannyw 5y ago
  Yes.
thatthatis 5y ago
What’s the deal with captable.io transitioning from “a public service for every startup to safeguard their equity from day one” to basically the same price model as carta? Why weren’t legacy companies given grandfathered pricing?
jsfeit81 5y ago
Hi Eric - don’t know what AMA means (sorry), but I would like to talk about this with you / your team. I also sent you a note via your website and Twitter. Bottom line is that coverage of your recent announcement talks about dual listing. I’m wondering if you’d be equipped to do a primary. Thanks! Jonathon Feit Jonathon.Feit@beyondlucid.com
- jschulenklopper 5y ago
  AMA: Ask Me Anything

Mat_Sherman 5y ago

What types of companies are able to list on LTSE?

jmholla 5y ago
The article says the following: > To list on LTSE in August, Twilio and Asana are agreeing to a slate of commitments such as aligning executive and board compensation with long-term performance; taking customers and employees into account; and explaining how the company’s board oversees its long-term strategy. These commitments must be concrete policies that can be monitored by LTSE.

KaoruAoiShiho 5y ago

LTSE is a sorely needed financial innovation but all the stuff around social impact is a new burden I think... Not everyone's going to be interested in that, oh well.

eries 5y ago
It's definitely not for everybody!

bedhead 5y ago

For people who value virtue signaling more than liquidity.

eries 5y ago
I get that you're just being snarky here, but I've often wondered about comments like this. When did being virtuous become an insult? I actually think the ancient view of virtue is due for a bit of a comeback. Increasingly, investors and employees both want to know which companies are actually purpose- and mission-driven and which ones are not. I don't see the harm in giving them a way to signal that, as long as it's real. I also don't understand the "liquidity" part of your comment either. LTSE is a participant in something called the National Market System which guarantees that every stock listed on every National Securities Exchange has the exact same level of access to liquidity.
- anonymouse008 5y ago
  From what I’ve been able to gather, Liquidity just means being able to get out of a bad decision at little to no cost. Basically no one wants to hold risk anymore, but still have growth… which is the fundamental flaw in the markets that continues to rear its ugly head in exotic derivatives
  - epgui 5y ago
    Liquidity only eliminates the type of risk that is associated with liquidity. Having less liquidity risk does not in any way mean you're more likely to lose money in general. Less liquidity means there's a larger bid-ask spread: if you're in a rush to either buy or sell, there's a chance you'll pay a premium for a quick trade. If you're not in a rush, you probably won't pay this premium at all.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - hogFeast 5y ago

endisneigh 5y ago

I can’t read the full article but: > To list on LTSE in August, Twilio and Asana are agreeing to a slate of commitments such as aligning executive and board compensation with long-term performance; taking customers and employees into account; and explaining how the company’s board oversees its long-term strategy. These commitments must be concrete policies that can be monitored by LTSE. If such agreements are broken what’s the punishment, other than presumably being dislisted? If there are none it seems like an empty platitude given that you can already buy both on the “regular” stock exchange. Is daytrading prohibited? If not seems like it’s still bound by the same short term nonsense. I’d be impressed if you can only buy and sell on the LTSE once a year. Money being put where the mouth is and all that.

eries 5y ago
The requirements are embodied in the listing standards of the exchange, and have enforcement mechanisms equivalent to other listing standards. The SEC takes this stuff quite seriously - as they should - so instances of companies violating listing standards are thankfully pretty rare. I expect the same thing here. In terms of the requirements on trading that you mention, a requirement like that would violate current SEC rules about trading. But remember that companies are the metaphorical "central bank" of their own currency and can do all kinds of things that would reward those investors who truly are committed for the long-term. We don't have anything to announce in this area at this time, but I hope to be able to say more some day.
- joecool1029 5y ago
  I do like that you explained why this is the case and didn't just provide a non-answer to it. Are you lobbying to get these sorts of rules changed? (last time the question came up: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19886420 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19886420 )
  - eries 5y ago
    It's not quite a simple as the word "lobbying" implies. But we are in active conversations with a lot of the other stakeholders on both the buy side and sell side to see if we can find ways to bring some flavor of this to the markets. But I really can't be more specific because we don't have anything concrete to report - yet. I will say that I expect companies will also have opportunities to innovate in this area when it comes to their own stock, though I do think it will take a while as the industry is relatively conservative about things like this.

jonplackett 5y ago

Twilio’s great but what does everyone think of their long term prospects? Pretty much every automatically sent text message / WhatsApp is probably sent from Twillo already. What is next for them?

nbclark 5y ago
They seem to be expanding successfully into video and email. I'd expect the next big lift to be the sequencing of those different mediums.
dhritzkiv 5y ago
Sending SMSes is their core offering, for sure, but I think that's selling them short. They also offer programmable text+voice, chat rooms, video chat etc. Lots of useful stuff for building/bootstrapping your own platforms. Their other product (through acquisition) is SendGrid, for transactional emails. I imagine what's next is more of the same: solutions to do with different ways of communicating. Perhaps no-code/low-code variants to many of their offerings, much like what Stripe is doing (powerful technical layer, but also very business friendly introductory solutions)
skinnymuch 5y ago
Their peak stock price was like 20% higher than right now. With a lot of similar cloud companies hitting all time highs, Twilio’s market cap would exceed $75B if they hit all time high again. Acquisitions can do quite a bit. That’s how Salesforce runs :). Twilio bought Segment for $3.2 in stock.
tootie 5y ago
Asana is the shocker for me. I've seen many, many enterprises big and small and barely a handful were running Asana. And none of them liked it.
- whiddershins 5y ago
  I love it. We’ve used it for years.
- 5y ago

JumpCrisscross 5y ago

It’s hard to make the claim that public markets overly prioritise the short term with the last weeks’ string of EV start-ups IPOs / SPAC mergers and ExxonMobile Board manoeuvre. At the same time, founder supervoting is falling out of favor. This neatly backdoors to the same result—founders (and institutional investors, who can invest through a long-holding front end and then allocate exposure to that on the back end) gaining outsized influence over individual investors (who aren’t coördinated) and hedge funds. Seems like a lot of collateral damage.

BeFlatXIII 5y ago
Would you consider founders and institutional investors having influence that hedge funds will not have to be a good, bad, or neutral arrangement?

rossmohax 5y ago

Is it why Asana CEO buys 160000 shares every day, pumping up price?

skinnymuch 5y ago
Is there any citation for this? Asana’s stock has been absolutely bananas recently.
- rossmohax 5y ago
  Scroll to "Insider trading" section at the bottom https://finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=asan https://finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=asan
  - skinnymuch 5y ago
    Oh man. Wish I had known this earlier. Maybe I would’ve jumped on the bandwagon. Moskovitz has to be worth between $10-30B with Facebook nearing a trillion market cap. $7.5-$10M daily stock purchases is nothing for him. He could do it for 60 total days without affecting him financially at all. I have to check the comps, but Monday.com was valued more than Asana just like two weeks ago and far more before the pumping began. How much better could Monday.com’s financials be
  - willcipriano 5y ago
    Never used finviz before, but I found a simpler link: https://finviz.com/insidertrading.ashx?oc=1549917&tc=1&b=2 https://finviz.com/insidertrading.ashx?oc=1549917&tc=1&b=2
mistrial9 5y ago
I find the name Asana for a company, to be offensive as cultural appropriation. Secondly, I am absolutely opposed to the Surveillance Capitalism model, which these people have driven relentlessly. This combination feels dystopian.

neonate 5y ago

https://archive.is/KzTDN https://archive.is/KzTDN

yellow_lead 5y ago

> The CEOs of both companies, which also are listed on the New York Stock Exchange, were early investors in LTSE with financial stakes of less than 1.5%. So the CEOs of Twilio and Asana invested in this exchange then convinced their board to list on it. I'm sure they're not just interested for personal gain though.

andreareina 5y ago
> To list on LTSE in August, Twilio and Asana are agreeing to a slate of commitments such as aligning executive and board compensation with long-term performance; taking customers and employees into account; and explaining how the company’s board oversees its long-term strategy. These commitments must be concrete policies that can be monitored by LTSE. Sounds like a good thing.

sngz 5y ago

i remember reading about asana on here years ago. wasn't it supposed to be the thing that saved us from JIRA but ended up turning into the very thing everyone hated about JIRA?

alberth 5y ago

ELI5 Can someone provide the simple overview of (a) how LTSE is different, (b) what the listed company pro/cons are and (c) what are the investor pro/cons

antman 5y ago

Never heard of a long term stack exchange. Is this a US thing against HFTs?