[beering]

It's not zero financial interest, but certainly more indirect and less compelling.

If investors in Lambda ISAs are not getting good returns, the value of buying a Lambda ISA will go down. If Lambda can't sell ISAs for a good price, they won't get the operating income they need or will have to shoulder the ISA themselves.

Still, selling the ISA just feels shady relative to the marketing that touts ISAs as aligning incentives.

[hundt]

Selling the ISAs would make it more indirect, but this article is referring to borrowing against the ISAs' future income, which does not make it more indirect.

[akanet]

allred copped to straight up actually selling ISAs in the past (despite denials) as well

[hundt]

Yep, if Austen misled people that's bad. I am just disputing the argument that the later practice of using them as collateral for a loan is financially similar to selling them.

[x0x0]

Why do you find that less compelling? As you point out, even if Austin sold hopes and dreams and/or investor story time for the first two years of ISAs, eventually there will be hard results to model out. So how does that misalign incentives?