3 ms·
> Because they take on significant risks, investors expect to get “VIP” head-of-line privileges to be paid upon a liquidation event such as an acquisition. I’d
by dclowd9901 3y ago
> Because they take on significant risks, investors expect to get “VIP” head-of-line privileges to be paid upon a liquidation event such as an acquisition.
I’d like to challenge this notion. Risk comes from one factor and one factor only: how much skin do you have in the game?
Skin isn’t money. Skin is how much are you in for. How much would this hurt if you lost.
The ultra rich, when investing, have actually very little skin in the game. A million here, a million there. What’s the difference? They’ll still be impossibly wealthy even if everything goes tits up.
Those folks should not make the big bucks in a deal. They haven’t risked anything, even some notion that they “risked” investing their money in this vs that: they picked the winner in this case.
It’s fanciful thinking I know, but I see it as _the primary_ problem with either capitalism, or ultra wealth. The system favors people with the most money, and the people with the most money control the system.
- Ray20 3y ago>A million here, a million there. What’s the difference? Like you said - the difference is a million here, a million there. >They’ll still be impossibly wealthy even if everything goes tits up. They will millions less impossibly wealthy >Those folks should not make the big bucks in a deal. Why? Why is it wrong for them to make the big bucks in a mutually beneficial deal? >They haven’t risked anything They literally risked millions >but I see it as _the primary_ problem with either capitalism, or ultra wealth I don't completely understand what exactly the problem is >and the people with the most money control the system. This is literally one of the strengths of capitalism over any other system: even people with the most money don't have control over the system.