41–50 of 200 posts
If you have to comply with SEC and the CEO can't post jokes on twitter, I dont really see what advantage there is over NYSE or NASDAQ.
Excited to see this. I hope it leads to a trend to listing sooner and giving access to retail investors much earlier. Buying Uber at a few dollars instead of $42 for example. The markets will operate like they want to unless there are explicit rules to stop it. Right now it's wait to IPO as long as possible, and HFT only accessible to huge companies. Retail is left with the scraps.
Retail is left with "the scraps" because it is much riskier to invest early on. Companies that fail early aren't heard about as much, because Joe Average's pension plan hasn't invested in them, but are still plentiful. And maybe Joe Average's pension plan shouldn't be investing in what are effectively PE-stage firms. I don't know if I'm right about this, but it seems such an exchange might contribute to something lik…
The expected value of early stage investing is certainly higher than lotteries in the US. Every poor Joe can spend thousands on lottery tickets that expire worthless, but cannot invest thousands in real companies that Joe believes will do very well in the future. Shouldn't Joe have access to companies earlier, if he currently can access lottery games?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There were times in India and Pakistan when every major city had a stock exchange. Pakistan held to tradition longer than India, and owners of 3 largest stock exchanges merged them into Karachi stock exchange, and later PSX only in 2016. In Pakistan, most listed businesses are much more "boring" than ones in US. Concrete factories, brick makers, seedling producers, farms. Regulations on disclosure are near nil, but l…
> I myself vehemently oppose the idea of collective ownership of means of production, which public companies embody I wouldn't call this "public" ownership, as the "public" does not own a company. Investors own a company, the pool of investors is simply enlarged such that the public may invest.
I don't really see how the rules mentioned will change things that much. > asking companies to limit executive bonuses that award short-term accomplishments. Why would I care as an investor? I still want the stock to go up quickly. Executives own stock and without a cash bonus wouldn't this incentive trying to get quick increases in stock value. > more disclosure to investors about meeting key milestones and plans, a…
I'm hopeful this is a happy balance, cause I find the shares without voting rights to be almost scams.
I don't really see how the rules mentioned will change things that much. > asking companies to limit executive bonuses that award short-term accomplishments. Why would I care as an investor? I still want the stock to go up quickly. Executives own stock and without a cash bonus wouldn't this incentive trying to get quick increases in stock value. > more disclosure to investors about meeting key milestones and plans, a…
I think the presumption underlying the LTSE is that short-term growth is at the expense of more valuable long-term growth, so it's structured to try and encourage long-term growth. If you don't hold that view, then you won't invest in those companies.
I do feel like that make a good point about voting power. If I own a stock, and it can go up 5% now, is the promise of additional voting power later on a valuable enough thing to make me not care about that 5%? It's possible I'm in it for the long term growth, so maybe I don't care about the 5%, but the voting power isn't the reason.
I don't really see how the rules mentioned will change things that much. > asking companies to limit executive bonuses that award short-term accomplishments. Why would I care as an investor? I still want the stock to go up quickly. Executives own stock and without a cash bonus wouldn't this incentive trying to get quick increases in stock value. > more disclosure to investors about meeting key milestones and plans, a…
What you want to do is reinvest profit from short term gains into long term securities that beat inflation to leverage risk.
>Executives own stock and without a cash bonus wouldn't this incentive trying to get quick increases in stock value.
Equity is worthless without liquidity, and that's more important than massive growth down the road for the rank-and-file that hold options. Frankly equity isn't the motivator it used to be. If you don't plan on staying in one gig for more than 18-24 months, there is very little reason to sacrifice time and money for equity.
That said, executives' focus on short term growth to cash out is a problem in and of itself - notice how companies like Disney and Apple have skyrocketed under CEOs focused on long term stability and growth over cashing out 18-24 months after their hiring. And everyone made way more money because of it.
>As a minor stock holder I have no interest in voting power
And minor stockholders don't make a difference in the day-to-day operation of a business. The activist investors that hold board seats do, however, and their focus on short term growth has caused many mid sized shops to collapse under pressure to grow, sacrificing long term stability for their employees for the profits of vultures.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What exactly stops them from investing anyways
HFT get special trading codes they use to their advantage. They can see when a large order is being placed by an institutional investor and use it to their advantage to skim off a little bit.
Getting rid of HFT wouldn't get rid of that kind of corruption, and getting rid of that corruption wouldn't get rid of HFT.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Retail is left with "the scraps" because it is much riskier to invest early on. Companies that fail early aren't heard about as much, because Joe Average's pension plan hasn't invested in them, but are still plentiful. And maybe Joe Average's pension plan shouldn't be investing in what are effectively PE-stage firms. I don't know if I'm right about this, but it seems such an exchange might contribute to something lik…
> Of course, I do think it can serve a useful purpose, but there is reason early-stage, private investment is restricted to qualified investors. The expected value of early stage investing is certainly higher than lotteries in the US. Every poor Joe can spend thousands on lottery tickets that expire worthless, but cannot invest thousands in real companies that Joe believes will do very well in the future. Shouldn't J…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Retail is left with "the scraps" because it is much riskier to invest early on. Companies that fail early aren't heard about as much, because Joe Average's pension plan hasn't invested in them, but are still plentiful. And maybe Joe Average's pension plan shouldn't be investing in what are effectively PE-stage firms. I don't know if I'm right about this, but it seems such an exchange might contribute to something lik…
> Of course, I do think it can serve a useful purpose, but there is reason early-stage, private investment is restricted to qualified investors. The expected value of early stage investing is certainly higher than lotteries in the US. Every poor Joe can spend thousands on lottery tickets that expire worthless, but cannot invest thousands in real companies that Joe believes will do very well in the future. Shouldn't J…
To be a company that's operationally mature enough to list on an exchange they're likely of the size of a company that could IPO on NYSE or Nasdaq. I don't think this will suddenly allow a flurry of startups to suddenly become public on a different exchange.
There's a huge narrative to the contrary, saying that companies like Uber are waiting to IPO until long after they are operationally mature.