5 ms·
That's a hell of an assumption. They'd have FU money, they don't run a charity.
by Mandatum 4y ago
That's a hell of an assumption. They'd have FU money, they don't run a charity.
- hn_throwaway_99 4y agoInvestors normally always have at least 1x liquidation preferences. Common stock is usually always wiped out when a company is sold for less than it raised.
- zeusk 4y agoYou think the investors that invested $310M on a $190M ran a charity?
- mahkeiro 4y agoYou think that employee that work for nothing in exchange of worthless options are also working for a charity?
- donkeyd 4y agoYes, they pretty much are. It's trickle up economics in this world. Employees only work for the benefits of investors and executives.
- zeusk 4y agoWhat's your point? Labor is compensated peanuts in comparison to capital. Neither is a charity, just that employees are materially worse off in these cases.
- ClumsyPilot 4y agoI always wondered about this - if capital interest rates are low, shouldn't capital be getting compensated very little? Shouldn't labour be worth more?
- meheleventyone 4y agoCapital has the power so nope.