3 ms·

But why do you think "investors/shareholders" are bad and private owners, good? Private owners are just 100% owning shareholders, whatever notions you have abou

• consp 4y ago
  > You have no guarantee a private owner wouldn't speed up the enshittification process. Sure, but as a private company at least you control who who wants to do that and are not bound by the "the price must go up" behavior of the shareholders since you only care about the dividends (this is a oversimplification).
  • vasco 4y ago
    > you control You who? The owner? > behavior of the shareholders The owner is a shareholder too. It's all the same thing, you're creating distinction where there is none. If anything a public company has way more controls and transparency. People usually cry when a company is taken private by private equity to squeeze every cent out of it. What do you think private equity is if not "a private owner not bound by shareholders"?