|
|
|
|
|
by genericresponse
3869 days ago
|
|
What I was saying with the "destroyed" was something like a reverse stock split. (Your proportional ownership stays the same, but your number of shares reduce.) The idea I was communicating that the number of shares itself is not a meaningful judge of anything unless you understand what those shares represent. If covenants are not in place, you could also "destroy" the proportional ownership of shares by diluting down to a negligible value. I guess what I'm saying is that people should always be sure they can trust management, ask for a cap table and probably consult a lawyer. |
|
You can dilute proportional ownership, but there you just shifted the meaning of the term "destroy" and are using it in a funny way. Dilution does not decrease value. The reason your percentage of the pie decreases due to dilution is because the pie is getting bigger. You still have the same absolute amount of pie on your plate. Nobody destroyed any pie.