3 ms·
Another case of a company “going public” but insiders retaining total control. I guess we’ll have to wait for the next market crash to get rid of these fake pub
by bradleyjg 5y ago
Another case of a company “going public” but insiders retaining total control. I guess we’ll have to wait for the next market crash to get rid of these fake public companies.
- ttul 5y agoA significant number of publicly traded companies — and not just new ones in tech - are tightly controlled by founding shareholders who have special shares. This is not an unusual practice even for public companies. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with taking your company public and retaining troll through special shares. Anyone who is able to do that massive built a pretty great company, otherwise the market would not support it.
- bradleyjg 5y ago> Anyone who is able to do that massive built a pretty great company, otherwise the market would not support it. In a normal market, I suspect many of these would not be supported, or would at least have to take a big discount to PE. But we are in the era when money pours into doge coin. You can’t conclude anything in such an environment.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago> we’ll have to wait for the next market crash to get rid of these fake public companies Given the lack of evidence for founder-controlled companies underperforming the market, I wouldn’t hold my breath. Particularly if the business is not reliant on outside capital (e.g. Uber under Kalanick, who was ousted despite having super-voting privileges).
- bradleyjg 5y agohttps://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=492353 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=492353
- echelon 5y agoHow was Kalanick ousted when he had super-majority voting? I know he was scandalous, fostered a toxic and sexist culture, and was abusive to employees, but how did he get removed if he had all the power?