|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 05:03 PM EDT |
I believe what they're referring too is, in the allocation of money into a
promising company (or..whatever) these funds didn't want to end up owning an
entire company. They'd run into that if they had very low stock prices and the
millions of shares involved gave them majority holder-ship to the point of
having enormous responsibilities (as board members etc) that they may not have
wanted.
Apple on the other hand, gave them a place to stick wads and wads of sweet sweet
money bills without requiring them to have to worry about any fiduciary duties
as board members because it gave them controlling interests. Where they could
just stick money n forget about it for awhile because it's the iphone and
itablet and ipod and i-gotta-buy-overpriced-stuff maker.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 05:05 PM EDT |
Isn't there an arrangement in some jurisdictions where the
brokerage fee is part calculated on number of units sold?
Also the number becomes important for dilution issues.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|