Destroying a hedge fund is also not a 'fundamental value', no matter how satisfying it might sound. Also, as I've said before, often the largest investors in hedge funds are pension funds or similar pooled vehicles, so screwing an investment fund like this doesn't always just stick it to the rich guys...
Im guessing their argument would be that while a majority of people know what they're doing / the risk they are exposed to, a lot of people are seeing the gains online right now and are jumping into it blindly. Big difference between WSBers buying in at 10-30$, and people from all around the internet now buying in at 300$
It is a pump in the sense that none of the fundamentals of the company have changed between December and now, the main event has been people buying stock with the express purpose of enabling a short squeeze. Legally, there could be an argument for it being market manipulation.
Not quite. Citadel is a very well known quant hedge fund. The main way Robinhood makes money (and can let people trade without commission) is by selling their customers order flow (legally) to Citadel. Citadel (legally) uses this customer information to, in the milliseconds before the customer, front-run the trade, buy the shares and sell them to the Robinhood users at a marginal profit.
I think it could also be that a lot of people will be 'calmed' by the design they're used to when you're trying to convince them of a new chip the average consumer might not understand
It incentivizes small teams, but in the sense that you want the smallest team possible to generate the highest returns. If that one extra associate can help you screen exponentially more deals, they'll still be more than worth it in the long run.
That's very interesting. (Pre-Corona) I used to spend a lot of days working in coffee shops all around the city. Never at all felt any time pressure, whether in a small independent shop or a Starbucks/Costa type place. That's helped of course by the better shops making good food, too.
Wouldn't the WFH culture also encourage (post-COVID) a lot of informal meetings, people getting together in coffee shops, bars etc to discuss things in person?
I finally started my blog, after putting it off for so long. It's still pretty raw and needs a lot of practice before my writing is really worth sharing, but it's a start.
Not sure how that's your takeaway from the announcement? Sounds more like they can cover the costs of hosting free plans from the revenue through enterprise customers, and so can attrack more customers without having to charge them
Monstly agree - but dividends that go to every owner aren't unfair per se, a cap on dividends would be very good, though. As for options, depending on the company they can be a hiring incentive, and not being able to grant any may restrict the company going forward - has to be evaluated carefully.
I do, for the sole reason that at the end of (almost) every private equity deal is an exit, and in order for the company to be sold at a higher price than it was bought, it still has to be good/better at what it is supposed to be doing. Also, from my experience for these sorts of Tech deals, the level of due diligence conducted before an exit by potential buyers can be extensive, so I doubt they'd let the security parts of a security business go bad.
They could just as well be buying it as a platform for their portfolio, and look to buy more similar companies to consolidate. PE is more than just buying struggling companies, it’s often buying fairly valued companies in a fast growing sector, and then expanding them, or finding ways to cut costs.
Why are you automatically assuming their goal is to load the company with bad debt? That’s only the outcome if the acquisition and plan are unsuccessful...
On this subject, there is a very interesting new book about Jim Simmons, the founder of Renaissance Technologies, who used to work as a codebreaker in the US. I think for many of the people in these programs, the attraction is getting to solve problems beyond anyone else's reach, with tools beyond anyone else's reach.
I don't see why not? The prizes are handed out by the Nobel foundation, which is independent of government, and as far as I know, financially self-sustaining, so there are no sponsors to upset, and no government that has oversight.
Regarding 1. the risk can also be substantially lower for PE firms, because A. Extensive FVDD (Financial Vendor Due Diligence) and other types of risk assessment are carried out over the negotiation phase, and you are far less susceptible to stock market movements. Also, unlike investing in public companies, the PE fund is almost always the sole investor in the business alongside a small management tie-up, meaning you actually have full control over the business financially and strategically
I definitely felt like that for a long time. With automation, I only have a few ones right now: One that is activated with my alarm in the morning and opens my Things agenda and the weather, and ones toggling Do not disturb when I get to/leave work.
Of course, everything shortcuts can do can be done manually, but for some I think it can be worth it to automate or reduce the workload of a lot of menial tasks
To be fair, I still feel like it all depends on the company's definition of value. There is an interesting book on Financial Analysis by McKinsey, in which two of the firm's partners write in the foreword that the maximisation of shareholder value should always take into account long term thinking, and as such has to consider the deeper effect of a company's action. In that argument, then, a company isn't truly maximising shareholder value when it depletes its workforce and creates a bad work environment for short term profits, because the long term consequences may be far more negative.
An S-1 is the prospectus a company has to file before going public. It includes historical financials, an overview of the business, go-to-market and a lot of additional information. It should generally tell you everything relevant about the company.