[ijpoijpoihpiuoh]

I wonder how that would work. Suppose the UK generates a unicorn with a billion pounds of profit per year. Suppose that unicorn employs 10k employees. Presumably, everyone gets an equal stake in the employee share. So each employee is entitled to

    1B pounds * 1/10 * 1/10000 = 10k pounds

of profit. For folks earning the minimum wage at the company, that would be huge, since that profit sharing effectively increases the wage floor. For everyone else, I imagine the company would just pay reduced wages on the order of the amount of profit sharing, since it would not need to pay more to attract the requisite talent.

Of course, that's only if the company offers a dividend. I wonder how buybacks are modeled in this case? Since the employee share isn't marketable, the employee doesn't derive any immediate benefit from a buy-back. I guess you'd have to increase the employee share beyond the 10% limit at that point. In theory, the company could over time buy back all the non-employee shares, then it would be employee-owned in its entirety. And if the company offers more shares? Do the employees get diluted? I guess not. That seems weird too.

[ScottBurson]

> the company would just pay reduced wages on the order of the amount of profit sharing, since it would not need to pay more to attract the requisite talent

Not necessarily true. Much of that talent might have joined precisely on the hope of receiving above-market compensation if the business did well.