shareholding

Assuming you have control or influence over 51% of the shareholding, then why not just issue more shares?

Otherwise we end up in the usual situation where the taxpayer is left to pick up the environmental and economic cost of somebody's shareholding profits.

In this case, because: 1/ As a minority shareholder, you don't have control over the Alibaba shareholding.

Sure I didn't get to cash out my shareholding (though maybe some day I will, as the firm is still successful thanks to the product I built).

What happens to their shareholding in these sideways companies when the fund wraps up?

Its a representation of the state of assets being debt/credit or company shareholding.

Eventually I realised I could not stay there any more, despite having a small shareholding.

It's a way to create a world of public shareholding...

I have quite a few clients where management and executive shareholding staff actually work for a different company than the rest of the company.

He has varying stakes in the other companies which vary from outright ownership, majority holding, minority holding, to brand licensing deals with occasional informal management input but no shareholding.

Especially considering that MS has a ~1.3% Facebook (preferred) shareholding; that's 32.5 million shares, currently priced at $1.95bn - they won't be attacking FB with a patent suit any time soon.

What your legal obligations are, under your contract and any relevant legislation or case law, and how do you ensure you don't fuck up and accidentally screw yourself out of your equity/shareholding/vesting/whatever.

I suspect this would not be easy to do if "traditional" institutional investors have voting rights commensurate with their shareholding in the company.

Interestingly enough, one of the founders disagrees with all those listed "buy" ratings to the extent of selling >90% of his shareholding on the open market at well below their price targets at the back end of last week.

There is also the possibility of keeping a share of the intellectual property rights, which are almost totally given away in the current system." * Repeatedly we see state investments in companies pursuing political objectives with their shareholding at the expense of development or the company's interest.