Return to “Academy, You're Fired!”
That's why I lead off with 'It's sort of an irrelevant point ...' :)Soccerdad1995 wrote:But I think the original point is that Academy has fewer owners to answer to since they are privately held. That is true regardless of how Academy is structured.
It's sort of an irrelevant point, but being privately held and not having shares and shareholders are not the same thing. I have owned shares in a non-public company (I owned them because I exercised option grants that if I hadn't exercised would have expired, and I figured I'd rather be out $x if the company never went public than regret letting them expire if the company did go public. Which turned out fairly ok in the end, but made doing my taxes a PITA the year the company went private again after it had gone public a couple of years earlier) . Whether or not Academy has shares will be based on whether or not the investment company that owns them *wants* Academy to be set up so that it has shares, and if those shares aren't publicly traded the only people that would be able to easily determine if there are shares or shareholders would be those private shareholders - which, if Academy does have shares, may be in fact be just the company that owns them. And if they do have private shareholders, those private shareholders may have essentially zero pull with respect to what the company does.steveincowtown wrote:Not sure what the path your going down is supposed to mean, but yes they do have investors, but no they do not have shareholders.
