9 ms·
If you’re profitable and can pay it back, it’s better than equity. If there’s any financial risk then it may not be worth the potential loss of control.
by mathattack 3mo ago
If you’re profitable and can pay it back, it’s better than equity.
If there’s any financial risk then it may not be worth the potential loss of control.
- adam_arthur 3mo agoWould depend on the yield on debt vs yield on equity (factoring in earnings growth rate) If your company trades at 100x sales you should probably sell the equity.
- mathattack 3mo agoIt’s not just yield. Its debt gets paid first. And if you miss the interest payments the debt holders get the company.
- spwa4 3mo agoIf you mean that taking out any kind of debt is fundamentally a bet that whatever is being put up as collateral will grow faster than the interest rate? Because if it doesn't the risk that suddenly debt holders control you grows by a lot. Yes, absolutely. So, applied to GOOG, Alphabet Management is betting they will grow more than 4.5% per year at least until 2030. There is also some weirdness, like Alphabet making a 500 million USD bet short term USD interest rates will be lower than 4% over the 2025-2028 period.
- mathattack 3mo agoSort of. They can use the debt to grow, in which case they’re betting that they will get more profit than the principal plus interest payments. (Beating a 4% return on the loan, not the whole company) They could also use it to change the capital structure buying back shares. This simultaneously increases risk and share price, unless the reissue more shares. In both cases, if they can’t pay the interest payments, the company gets handed over to the creditors. Not an issue for Google, but a lot of startups struggle with venture debt.