|
|
|
|
|
by mason55
2464 days ago
|
|
I mean, it likely doesn't hurt anything. I'm sure the underwriters (JPM etc.) have spoken to their institutional clients and no one has said "getting rid of Adam will make my valuation go down." So you get rid of Adam (and his supermajority voting rights) have some quiet conversations about how people value the company now. Then you decide if you're willing to take whatever haircut the market is offering from the last private round. If We is to be believed the other option is to halt all expansion. They claim that mature locations are cash flow positive. If that's true then you don't necessarily need to take a haircut, you just stop expanding, prove to the market that you actually do have a business, and then either start siphoning off the cash or try to IPO again. |
|