there's reason to believe SoftBank is gonna go "boom", and in a big way: - they have tons of illiquid assets (equity in startups and early stage companies - hard to shed - see later) - SoftBank Vision Fund "borrows" from its huge illiquid assets (Uber + other SV stuff) in order to make the market by throwing around insane amounts of cash ($billions); in other words, they make their own markets in order to pump up the…
I have a conspiracy theory kicking around in my head that Softbank might be a money laundering or tax saving scam of some sort.
Why else would you invest 300 million in a dog walking app ?
You sort of have to pay to become a partner to buy your equity share, that's just how it works, and as the other poster said, you can get a loan from the partnership to pay for your partnership buy in
I checked that and I don't see that requirement for Goldman Sachs or any other partnership set up - the potential for corruption and nepotism is huge if its pay to play. Some form of coops Mondragon for example do but that is a very different type of employment.
Goldman's partnership today is that in name only. Prior to the firms IPO new partners did indeed have to buy their way in (via loans!).
there's reason to believe SoftBank is gonna go "boom", and in a big way: - they have tons of illiquid assets (equity in startups and early stage companies - hard to shed - see later) - SoftBank Vision Fund "borrows" from its huge illiquid assets (Uber + other SV stuff) in order to make the market by throwing around insane amounts of cash ($billions); in other words, they make their own markets in order to pump up the…
I don't think softbank owns half of Japanese corporate bonds. It may be that its bonds account for over half the market.
It's neither. They account for half of the retail JPY corparate market. Much different and smaller market than overall (institutional) corporate market. Half of JPY corporate markets is an astronomical number that doesn't pass a basic sniff test.
there's reason to believe SoftBank is gonna go "boom", and in a big way: - they have tons of illiquid assets (equity in startups and early stage companies - hard to shed - see later) - SoftBank Vision Fund "borrows" from its huge illiquid assets (Uber + other SV stuff) in order to make the market by throwing around insane amounts of cash ($billions); in other words, they make their own markets in order to pump up the…
Aside from the corporate bonds, how do these points differ much from other similar megacorps or investment banks?
You sort of have to pay to become a partner to buy your equity share, that's just how it works, and as the other poster said, you can get a loan from the partnership to pay for your partnership buy in
I checked that and I don't see that requirement for Goldman Sachs or any other partnership set up - the potential for corruption and nepotism is huge if its pay to play. Some form of coops Mondragon for example do but that is a very different type of employment.
Goldman Sachs hasn't been a partnership since they IPO'd. They just use "partner" as a title for legacy reasons.
In general, a partnership is a collection of equity owners ("the partners"). To become a partner you have to buy equity, usually sold by a retiring partner.
Sometimes "new partners" are created by diluting the stock; this is generally avoided unless the person is expected to grow the business by at least that much.
Can someone explain to me how this is not like that episode of Arrested Development where they steal a dollar from the banana stand and then throw out a banana to "cancel it out"?
there's reason to believe SoftBank is gonna go "boom", and in a big way: - they have tons of illiquid assets (equity in startups and early stage companies - hard to shed - see later) - SoftBank Vision Fund "borrows" from its huge illiquid assets (Uber + other SV stuff) in order to make the market by throwing around insane amounts of cash ($billions); in other words, they make their own markets in order to pump up the…
Aside from the corporate bonds, how do these points differ much from other similar megacorps or investment banks?
Neither acts as a VC fund that is forced to overpay for things since it has too much capital to deploy.
Softbank's deals - Sprint, WeWork, and now this - make me question their financial intelligence.
Their last Uber investment is under water... wouldn't be surprised if the $2b in WeWork stock they purchased is crushed as well at IPO time -- but at least they didn't follow through with the $8b they initially promised to Adam.
I read that SoftBank structured their investment in some way that they made money on the IPO even though the price was below what they bought in at.
It didn't really make any sense to me, but I wanted to ask here:
Is there any truth to that? And if so how did it work?
You sort of have to pay to become a partner to buy your equity share, that's just how it works, and as the other poster said, you can get a loan from the partnership to pay for your partnership buy in
I checked that and I don't see that requirement for Goldman Sachs or any other partnership set up - the potential for corruption and nepotism is huge if its pay to play. Some form of coops Mondragon for example do but that is a very different type of employment.
Goldman sachs isn't a partnership, and the potential for corruption and nepotism is always huge in any structure. That's why they extend loans to new partners, but the whole point is that partners no longer take salaries, they are equity holders in the actual firm, and they're obviously not going to let just anyone become a partner because they have money. What exactly do you see as the difference here between having to buy your way into the partnership after the other partners vote and then taking equity versus being promoted to partner after the other partners vote and then taking a salary? Who exactly is supposed to own the law firm in the second case if not the partners?
Can someone explain to me how this is not like that episode of Arrested Development where they steal a dollar from the banana stand and then throw out a banana to "cancel it out"?
Of course it's nothing like that. That was one dollar, while this is 20 billion.