Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Ialwayslie008 t1_j0xy6bx wrote

Reply to comment by drawkbox in Over 67,000 DraftKings Betting Accounts Hit by Hackers by chrisdh79

I don't think that's true at all. The top 5 shareholders are Vanguard, ARK, Nikko, Capital Research, and BlackRock, owning a combined 22%.

23

nilogram t1_j0y1o2m wrote

Aren’t shareholders and funders technically different? Correct me if I’m wrong I’m more asking

3

god-doing-hoodshit t1_j0y2rgl wrote

Shareholders and “funders” are essentially the same thing.

Early investors or founding investors usually get more shares of the company since there is more risk involved, but either way stock in the company is the transaction.

9

nilogram t1_j0y2txj wrote

Got it ty for clarifying so in this case the foreign entities or funders would still be shareholders unless they sold out?

3

god-doing-hoodshit t1_j0y364u wrote

Yeah,

If they invested early and own a good percentage then the return on their investment will be positive which is why they do it. Betting company is a no brainer.

Foreign investment in the best economy to park your money is not strange either.

Although OP has a point, we expose ourself to tricky situations, for example if a company like Twitter is backed by foreign actors there should be some securities in place but free market/mah profits is important. For reasons.

4

nilogram t1_j0y3iag wrote

Yeah definitely thanks for your added knowledge and perspective

2

drawkbox t1_j10imuo wrote

Funders are pre-IPO and control the board, subsequent funding and essentially everything about the company. Even with massively big investors post-IPO this is still the case.

3

nilogram t1_j10l79j wrote

Thanks for the clarification! Have an awesome day too

2

drawkbox t1_j10mdib wrote

You as well.

Yeah some people forget to just base it on their own experience. At most companies, everyone knows the original funders have all the pull and all the control. Even if you IPO, even if there are large institutional shareholders. A new tactic of foreign money is setup the initial funding and companies, then draw in the West investment on top, but retaining control.

Many, many companies have been setup this way in the last two decades. For instance, Tesla got 85% of all pre-IPO and post-IPO funding from Chinese banks, that has leverage attached. Even this here reddit was setup that way (DST Global via Yuri Milner like Facebook, Twitter and others -- same funders of DraftKings)

1

nilogram t1_j112esd wrote

Love this thank u! 95% of people don’t realize who really owns what in the big businesses

2

Ialwayslie008 t1_j0y2661 wrote

I guess I don't know what a funder is. Why would someone invest in a company with nothing in return unless it's a bank, in which case it doesn't matter if they're receiving bank loans from foreign entities, they have zero power or say.

1

nilogram t1_j0y2g1l wrote

I think it’s related to like VCs and people who initially put up the funding BEFORE it’s on the stock market.

2

Ialwayslie008 t1_j0y2yq0 wrote

They would own a percentage of the company, thus would be considered investors, no?

I do know the page I was using for a reference (CNN's money site) was wrong, since Disney owns over 6% as well.

2

nilogram t1_j0y30xm wrote

Yeah I guess they would be stock holders but not sure if or what % they retain

1

god-doing-hoodshit t1_j0y2taw wrote

Even banks don’t do that. They only invest if they see a very likely return

1

Butterbuddha t1_j0z8m6y wrote

Oh shit! Y’all are finding my 401k! Game on I say!!

3

taptapper t1_j0ya93h wrote

Malaysian and Russian tech, support, coding, back office...

1