Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stripe sets one-year timetable to decide on going public

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 147 posts

Re: Stripe sets one-year timetable to decide on going public

#41

Post by Province1108 »

rvz wrote: post #10

Maybe they should have IPO'd or directly listed in 2019 at the very peak when everyone else was rushing to the exit as I said before [0]. Of course this is also not in hindsight either. [1] Seems like they now don't want to wait anymore and just unload their shares into the market and especially onto retail investors. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32567217 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20993919

Not really when the terms of private financing during the bull run were very generous for valuations and terms.

There are big downsides to being public, including all the regulatory requirements and pandering to institutional investors.

Now the bull market is over and private money is tighter, they don't really have a choice but to raise money publicly.

Re: Stripe sets one-year timetable to decide on going public

#42

Post by ddorian43 »

changoplatanero wrote: post #18
TekMol wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been paying and being paid for decades now, and I have never involved a payment processor in a dispute I had with the other side. If arbitration is the reason these companies exists, it seems like bad deal. Maybe they sell an illusion?

Maybe your credit card number was stolen without your knowledge and they took care of it for you without you even being aware

Nah.

Re: Stripe sets one-year timetable to decide on going public

#43

Post by willcipriano »

changoplatanero wrote: post #18
TekMol wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been paying and being paid for decades now, and I have never involved a payment processor in a dispute I had with the other side. If arbitration is the reason these companies exists, it seems like bad deal. Maybe they sell an illusion?

Maybe your credit card number was stolen without your knowledge and they took care of it for you without you even being aware

They took care of it for themselves, when someone commits fraud it isn't your problem because they used your name to do it.

Imagine if you were defrauded for a few hundred bucks by someone claiming to be a big celebrity. You probably wouldn't even be able to get into contact with the actual person, let alone have them jump through a bunch of hoops, spend time on hold with your staff or go to the post office to send you copies of documents. They wouldn't bother to respond to you, they have no obligation to, whatever happened had nothing to do with them.

Re: Stripe sets one-year timetable to decide on going public

#44

Post by djbusby »

TekMol wrote: post #14
timerol wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. (Channels patio11) As a society we have decided to delegate a bunch of responsibilities to the companies that move money. The most notable one is fraud protection. The companies that make this much money do so by pretending that a transfer of money is a clean, simple, and absolute thing. In reality it is messy, reversible, and fraud-prone. Being able to transfer $1B dollars as easily as you are able to transfer $…

I have been paying and being paid for decades now, and I have never involved a payment processor in a dispute I had with the other side. If arbitration is the reason these companies exists, it seems like bad deal. Maybe they sell an illusion?

I've used banks and cards to help resolve fraud. Rarely, but I love it.

And now the bank pushed me to use Zelle - which has zero protection.

Re: Stripe sets one-year timetable to decide on going public

#45

Post by Blackthorn »

bgorman wrote: post #25
shawnz wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's because the earliest RSUs they issued are expiring this year: https://www.theinformation.com/articles/stripes-early-stock-...

Wouldn't it be good for the company to let these RSUs expire? How does it benefit the company to make sure these exercise?

If they don't let them exercise, the existing employees will rightly see it as funny money and not actual compensation. They won't be employees for much longer after that.

Especially since Stripe has steadfastly refused to go public so far...

Re: Stripe sets one-year timetable to decide on going public

#46

Post by rglover »

lxgr wrote: post #35
rglover wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, with Bitcoin.

Does Bitcoin support dispute resolution (i.e. chargebacks) yet?

It doesn't need to. Transact with vendors you actually trust who have a track record you can verify (which necessitates people being trustworthy to earn business—unlike our current economic order).

Re: Stripe sets one-year timetable to decide on going public

#47

Post by encoderer »

winphone1974 wrote: post #34
encoderer wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In some ways, yes, but I think if you game it out, you see how the company loses in a number of ways. First, repetitional risk. Second, it’s likely that a liquidity provider would emerge who could offer, basically, to buy call options from individual holders for enough premium to cover the taxes due on exercise. (Stripe would not want an unaffiliated 3rd party accumulating a large position)

Transfer and using them as collateral are typically prohibited explicitly in the agreement, so I'd be surprised if this could happen

Then call it a promisary note.

Re: Stripe sets one-year timetable to decide on going public

#48

Post by abigail95 »

methodical wrote: post #22
rglover wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, with Bitcoin.

And by using Bitcoin to automate all these transactions you get a bunch of very cool features such as constantly being at risk of losing your life savings due to phishing, scamming, hacking, etc., etc., etc. unless you store a hard wallet in your intestines and memorize the recovery words (better hope you don't forget any or your life savings is gone!). The cool thing about all of this is that it's a feature of Bitco…

It's a different kind of cash (like banknotes). It has different security tradeoffs because the owner is the custodian and you aren't paying a chain of intermediaries.

It's not a feature of cash that it can be stolen, every object can be stolen. The distinctive attribute is transactions are public and immutable.

A car can be driven by its owner anywhere they like. If someone described a car to you as a suicide box you can crash and die in - you might say yes, the fact that cars can be driven freely by their owners means you might drive into someone else. But that's a consequence of the feature, not the feature itself.

Re: Stripe sets one-year timetable to decide on going public

#50

Post by kasey_junk »

rglover wrote: post #46
lxgr wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does Bitcoin support dispute resolution (i.e. chargebacks) yet?

It doesn't need to. Transact with vendors you actually trust who have a track record you can verify (which necessitates people being trustworthy to earn business—unlike our current economic order).

And on the vendor side? Are you suggesting that either all sellers know a) the credit worthiness of their customers or b) don’t extend any credit?

Either one seems like a major downside for the seller.

Post reply on HN