Earlier quoted context omitted.
Genuine question: is that legal? That seems incredibly shady.
Imagine you are a bank or investment firm or hedge fund or VC. You want to do business with person A, I shall call them “Alice.” Alice says to you, right up front, “I need to make one billion dollars, or I look for a different partner.” Are you going to accuse Alice of being greedy, when your entire business consists of making money? You don’t cure the sick, or bring the Internet to rural communities, or manufacture…
Troubles Mount for the We Company as Softbank Reportedly Calls for Shelving IPO
51–60 of 171 posts
Re: Troubles Mount for the We Company as Softbank Reportedly Calls for Shelving IPO
#52Re: Troubles Mount for the We Company as Softbank Reportedly Calls for Shelving IPO
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
Genuine question: is that legal? That seems incredibly shady.
Imagine you are a bank or investment firm or hedge fund or VC. You want to do business with person A, I shall call them “Alice.” Alice says to you, right up front, “I need to make one billion dollars, or I look for a different partner.” Are you going to accuse Alice of being greedy, when your entire business consists of making money? You don’t cure the sick, or bring the Internet to rural communities, or manufacture…
...but it's hard to care.
(i.e. the 'great' thing about this is that it makes being the founder completely risk-free, you make millions even if your firm craters)
Re: Troubles Mount for the We Company as Softbank Reportedly Calls for Shelving IPO
#54Tangential, but does anyone else find techcrunch UX absolutely dreadful on desktop?
Re: Troubles Mount for the We Company as Softbank Reportedly Calls for Shelving IPO
#55I fail to see how this company could survive a recession. The first thing companies do during a recession is reduce their headcount. Less headcount means less desks required.
Re: Troubles Mount for the We Company as Softbank Reportedly Calls for Shelving IPO
#56I know most HN readers look down upon the site, but I really like Zero Hedge's take on this. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-09-09/2-letters-20-billi... > Super-voting stock – Zuck did that and it worked out in the end > Accelerating losses – Look at all that revenue growth > Zero possibility of profits – Hasn’t mattered for years > Convoluted insider dealings on property leases – Property GPs always double dip s…
ZeroHedge is the type of site that will quickly be labelled alt-right, fake news etc. in reality they tend to just interpret events in much more extreme ways but still rely on largely factual sources. I find the commentary to be much more thought provoking than consensus outlets. Glad to see some fellow HN'ers peruse the site.
[1]https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-09-05/5-surprising-scien...
Re: Troubles Mount for the We Company as Softbank Reportedly Calls for Shelving IPO
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Genuine question: is that legal? That seems incredibly shady.
Look up what Eddie Lampert did with Sears. As far as I know, no criminal issues with his self dealing.
Re: Troubles Mount for the We Company as Softbank Reportedly Calls for Shelving IPO
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine you are a bank or investment firm or hedge fund or VC. You want to do business with person A, I shall call them “Alice.” Alice says to you, right up front, “I need to make one billion dollars, or I look for a different partner.” Are you going to accuse Alice of being greedy, when your entire business consists of making money? You don’t cure the sick, or bring the Internet to rural communities, or manufacture…
I don't understand what the point is here besides a vague loathing of the financial industry...
But its purpose is NOT to police self-dealing. And the people putting the money in are exactly the people who are directly responsible for governance.
Likewise, due to regulatory capture, the people who put money into businesses are closely related to the people who write laws about what is or isn’t legal, and enforce those laws.
So if Adam’s choices are ok with his investors, they are going to be structured in such a way that they are perfectly legal.
The bottom line:
If Adam provides an opportunity for his investors to make their “ten billion,” why would anyone object to his self-dealing?
Why do we, for that matter?
What crime is being committed, if everything is disclosed? What puritanical streak runs through us that we object to his leasing his own buildings back to his business on moral grounds?
Either he follows through and makes his investors rich, or he doesn’t. I have opinions about that, but at the end of the day, that is all that matters to his financiers, which is why he so-called “got away with it.”
And the things that were unwound were only unwound because they impacted the likelihood of his investors making money. It had nothing to do with crimes being committed or moral turpitude.
What you mistake for loathing is actually me putting money in black and white. Money is neutral. It’s not good, it’s not evil. What people do or don’t do to make it is good or evil. What people do with it is good or evil.
Leasing your trademarks to an entity you own? That’s just shuffling money around. It’s not evil and not a crime. It may affect somebody’s calculations about whether they want to buy a stock, but that’s exactly what the S-1 is for.
Re: Troubles Mount for the We Company as Softbank Reportedly Calls for Shelving IPO
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Genuine question: is that legal? That seems incredibly shady.
Imagine you are a bank or investment firm or hedge fund or VC. You want to do business with person A, I shall call them “Alice.” Alice says to you, right up front, “I need to make one billion dollars, or I look for a different partner.” Are you going to accuse Alice of being greedy, when your entire business consists of making money? You don’t cure the sick, or bring the Internet to rural communities, or manufacture…
Re: Troubles Mount for the We Company as Softbank Reportedly Calls for Shelving IPO
#60I fail to see how this company could survive a recession. The first thing companies do during a recession is reduce their headcount. Less headcount means less desks required.