7 ms·
You can't simultaneously have an open market for shares and highly regulated financial duties that protect investors. It would be better if there were options
by TimPC 3y ago
You can't simultaneously have an open market for shares and highly regulated financial duties that protect investors. It would be better if there were options for employees to cash out part of equity in intermediate rounds and there are upsides to having more tradeable companies but the downside are most of these companies are near-scam like in terms of success rate and you want substantial bars to protect people when something like 90% of start-ups go broke.
Agree also breaking corporate liability shield gets insane quickly. You're going to have pension funds go broke for owning stock in the wrong company and employees on the hook for start-up debts when start-ups fail.
- singleshot_ 3y agoPossibly worse, by removing the freedom to do business with partners of one’s choice, you would obliterate the justification for the “charging order” which would result in the loss of your business’ assets the moment part of its ownership passed to a debtor. Now in addition to the pension funds going under, all the businesses go too. Is GP sure they are imagineering solutions, and not much larger problems?