upvote

points

by alephnerd4 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby moregrist4 hours ago|
next
[-]
> In most cases an IPO isn't worth it for founders because an IPO means you lose operational control.

This is counterintuitive to me.

If you’re acquired, you’re giving up ownership and you tend to lose operational control unless you have agreements in place that say otherwise.

With an IPO it seems like you have a better chance to retain control: you can control the share allocations going into an IPO to give you solid voting power. While you’re accountable to a board of directors and theoretically accountable to stockholders, in reality management often runs the show, at least until the board runs out of patience with bad earnings.

reply
upvoteby SilverElfin4 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
The problem is if you go public as a small company, it can be hard to survive. You need to meet expectations every time you do an earnings call or watch your stock get crushed, and it’ll never be given another chance. The burdens are also a lot higher in terms of the cost.

You don’t really see companies under $10 billion going public anymore. That may continue to be the case, but it’s terrible for entrepreneurs.

reply
upvoteby femiagbabiaka3 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
> Israeli VCs tend to be uninterested in IPOs in general - too much of an operational headache and it's difficult to exit a position quickly.

Interesting, why is this more true of Israeli VC's as opposed to VC's in other markets?

reply