The thing about privately-held companies with not intention to go publoc is that the long-term viability of the company is more important than ever-increasing share value.

A public company can be the most profitable company in the world but still lose stock value if it isn't more profitable than last quarter.

[–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 2 points 8 months ago

Can still be more profitable than last quarter, but less profitable than expected. Lost value.

[–] Goodie@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

But companies don't always chase profit.

They can also chase growth and the appearance of a company that could or will make money one day. Ex Uber when it first came out and destroyed the taxi industry practically overnight.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yes, but they chase it in different ways.

A shareholder in a private company that's profitable well isn't losing money on the investment. A shareholder in a profitable publicly-held company might be losing money depending on when they bought in.

Additionally, the shareholders in the private company have to consider the future because they can't dump their shares as easily. That promotes sustainable business practices instead of chasing short-term gains at the cost of long-term viability.

[–] Goodie@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That makes no sense.

The only difference between a public company and a private company (in this sense) is how liquid the asset is, said another way, how easy it is to enter or exit the position, and how regularly the holdings value is recalculated.

I could buy 100k of valve stock of someone tomorrow, and then find myself wishing I'd bought NVIDIA. I could buy NVIDIA tomorrow, and it could crash and I could wish I'd bought in to Valve.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Exactly. When it's more difficult to enter and exit a position you need to take a longer-term view.