|
| ▲ | ballon_monkey 17 minutes ago | parent | next [-] |
| Facebook would never have become what it is today if Zuck had lost control of the voting. It would have been sold 10 times over and prob not exist today. I suspect the same could be said for Mask and his businesses. |
|
| ▲ | jdross 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| These have become some of the most valuable companies on Earth. The idea that there are lapses in governance in these companies is insane. Any shareholder is buying in fully aware of the governance structure. Many because of it! Shareholders’ rights are clearly enumerated. |
| |
| ▲ | janderson215 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I agree many buy because of the governance structure and founders retaining control, but there is a lot of dumb money out there. From Claude via stockanalysis.com:
META — institutions 67.51%, insiders 13.49%, float 2.19B of 2.54B shares outstanding. That leaves roughly 19% as retail/other. SPCX — institutions 5.95%, insiders 46.47%, float only 638.65M of 13.17B shares. Residual is ~47.6%, but that is not retail. | |
| ▲ | NuclearPM 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Any shareholder is buying in fully aware of the governance structure. This is laughable. Many shareholders don’t even know they own stock in these companies. | | |
| ▲ | andsoitis 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | That’s an indictment on them. You should know where you’re putting your money and why. If you delegate this to a professional or influencer, you do not get to blame them. After all, you could just buy something you think you understand better like real estate or keep it in cash. | | |
| ▲ | StilesCrisis 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You don't get much of a say in how your retirement fund is invested. | |
| ▲ | CamperBob2 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Exactly. If nothing else, you should know who you're supporting. Many people wouldn't support SpaceX and Tesla if they knew more about Musk. Conversely, some other people who don't know much about him might want to support his companies. |
|
| |
| ▲ | dragontamer 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The typical "investor" is an ETF these days. Your standard SPY or VTI investor doesn't know jack diddly squat about shareholder rights, nor do they ever plan to invoke them. | | |
| ▲ | DaedalusII 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | you should have a look at proxy firms. you would be surprised | | |
| ▲ | dragontamer 5 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Could you explain to me how an investor owning SPY shares gets to control the proxy vote? Oh, don't worry. I already know the answer. I'm asking if YOU can tell me the answer. |
|
| |
| ▲ | dgellow 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | In the case of Spacex that's literally not the case, when private investors bought shares the company was already a decade old and had a single class of shares. It's only since the IPO that the company switched to a dual structure, multiple years after private investors bought in. And class-B shares have only been given to Elon and a few of his friends. | | |
| ▲ | miohtama 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | The private investors were free to sue or arbitrage, as it is a private matter. There were disputes around SpaceX secondary market/special purpose vehicle shares before the listing, but they were all settled out of court, AFAIK. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | panarky 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Generally the 10x shares aren't traded so it's impossible to see if they trade at a premium. One exception is GOOG / GOOGL which both trade actively, and there's not much difference in price. The mechanism for a price divergence could be accumulation of the 10x shares to seize control, but even if you could buy the entire float, it wouldn't be enough to take control, so that mechanism never happens. |
| |
| ▲ | Polizeiposaune 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | There are three classes of Google stock. By voting rights, they have 10x (founder stock), 1x (trading as GOOGL), and 0x (trading as GOOG). The class with 10x voting rights does not trade publicly. The class with 1x voting rights does not have enough voting power to control the direction of the company so there is no real difference in perceived value between GOOG and GOOGL. Employee stock awards are IIRC all in restricted shares of GOOG (0x voting rights) so they don't dilute the power of the founders. | | |
| ▲ | panarky 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | You are correct. Interestingly, the 10x shares held by Brin and Page constitute only 11% of the economic value of Alphabet, but 51% of the voting control. And the 10x shares automatically convert to 1x shares upon transfer or inheritance, so if the founders cash out or die, the 10x supervoting power disappears. | | |
| ▲ | pyuser583 an hour ago | parent [-] | | Oh wow so that lets them honestly say they have the same value as other shares? |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | edoceo 32 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| No rights to compensation on bankruptcy. Payroll is first, then debt, taxes and stuff. Equity holders ride down to zero. |
|
| ▲ | chii 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > I wonder if the shares without these special rights will be substantially discounted it should be, but the market might be a bit irrational. |
|
| ▲ | dzonga 13 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] |
| zuck for all his fault - he ain't a scammer or wannabe scammer. he might have a large miss with the metaverse, & maybe current a.i effort. but in terms of being ruthless with competition & acquiring competition he did his job well as CEO. musky on the other hand - overpromising and underdelivering. |
