If I own a piece of a company, they should want my creative input and guidance. Otherwise what's the point of having me? If it's just to passively own the share, I wonder why they wanted to sell it.
I keep it (very) simple: The company only wants money and gets it because of you, the buyer. They do not need your input (except money badumtss).
High (stock) quotation = high(er) reputation, kind of. There is more behind all that.
Like I said:
When a company goes public (when they become a "stock"), they already exist and have the money they need. We're not talking about startups or needing funding. It's just transferring ownership, from the few people who originally owned it to a bunch of different hands.
Like ya, there can be a role for helping to fund a company and they just need cash and you stay out of it. Makes enough sense. But if it was a good deal you'd be able to find a few venture capitalists willing to fund it who could also add something. watch the show Shark Tank sometime lol, often they'll invest or not invest based on the connections they have and if they're able to help in some way.. it just makes more sense to invest in areas where you have an angle and can add value (and to seek investment from people who can).
collecting bits and pieces from random Moe Larry and Sallys is what crypto ICOs do lol, I don't think there's ever an actual need for that unless you know you wouldn't get the same valuation from seasoned VCs.
Ah sry, I am way too busy right now. Did not find any time to answer today. Hopefully tomorrow. I did not even read the whole article; should have added that, apparently.
Now I see what you actually mean(t); you are absolutely right, it is quite "redundant" respectively weird that they go public if they already have enough funds (reputation etc.) and the "right investors"; because the main reason of an IPO definitely is getting money, fame... (and b!tches jk :P). Maybe they do it because of "succession"... well, actually I am too tried right now (and you already wrote about ownership); Idk what else to say about that topic. Everything you stated seems legit imo.
My apologies for the chaotic paragraph.
no worries mr gandalf!! happy to be met with disagreement, curious if I'm wrong about something here, but ya, I was a little confused.. like wait, did he even read it? lol
but ya, no worries!!
So, finally haha
If I am not mistaken companies only go public because of the money. And maybe because of reputation. Well, I already wrote that - moreover you did too haha.
I really do not know anymore what I meant with "There is more behind all that." - probably only succession stuff or whatever.
However, it looks like I tried to disagree haha - but Idk what I should disagree on lol; again, you have written a pretty "logical" article. I probably was too stressed or whatever.
And that part about Africa (and Asia). Well, Idk if their economy is about to boom soon too (lol that word order). Asia - yes (at least when you looking at blockchain and stuff hah); but I do not think that Africa is about too "flourish" the next years. Other states still got too much influence there and are oppressing them.
Haha, I hear you.. I agree that it seems like I "should" be wrong about something (it's quite the claim I'm making), but I don't think I actually am lol
::shrugs::
Other states oppressing them is why I love speculating there. The oppression can eventually end. Whereas if you buy like General Motors or some established huge US company that everyone regards as safe, it has to be over-saturated.
So ya, maybe it will take a while for Africa to be 1st world, but if I had to pick countries to buy at their current prices, I'd rather pick the ones who are artificially held back and not currently popular investments, and essentially be speculating on improvement and more freedom and less oppression.
(But the caveat that makes it tricky is that when these conditions do improve, a lot of the progress is decentralized and maybe the stocks you'd buy now don't necessarily boom that much ::chin scratch face::)
Haha, yes, probably.
That definitely is correct. Thought about that too but I would still rather invest in cryptocurrencies instead of Africa (no offense Africa :D).
Absolutely legitimate. They are held back and they would do a lot better if nobody is oppressing them, of course; there are enough "western" companies which mess up Africa's economy as well, that is proof (eg. food industry).
True. That could be an issue.
ya, crypto >>> all 😛
Just waiting for it to blow up again - quite tedious... :P