3 ms·
>The company's purpose is to generate a return for their shareholders Absolutely correct, but who are the shareholders? If the investor owns less than half of
by MontyCarloHall 5y ago
>The company's purpose is to generate a return for their shareholders
Absolutely correct, but who are the shareholders? If the investor owns less than half of the company, then the majority of the shareholders comprise the founder and employees, who would come out way ahead selling their company at initial valuation. As you said, the goal of a company is to maximize all shareholders’ returns, not just the investor’s return.
> The investor's initial valuation was inflated because the company failed to develop anything that would be worth an exit appropriate to that valuation.
Why is the investor faultless here? Valuation could just as easily have been inflated because the investor failed to do proper due diligence in accurately estimating how much the company is truly worth.
- buescher 5y agoOK, you're a minority shareholder in a company and the founder screws you on the exit. This does happen. It can be perfectly legal. There's an illuminating and apropos anecdote about Steve Jobs and Pixar in Charles Ferguson's High Stakes, No Prisoners that I haven't seen printed elsewhere that might even be true. Do you ever invest in one of his ventures again? The idea that the investor is at fault if he gets hoodwinked is logic of the con man though: the mark is equally at fault!!!