[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance

View post   
File: 75 KB, 600x656, 1524874487663.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9743369 No.9743369 [Reply] [Original]

Help me understand,

Why would anyone acquire 100% of a company when you can acquire 51% (controlling stake) more cheaply and have a controlling interest (And then transfer over the assets to your own company/yourself)?

>> No.9743744

100% of the dividends

>> No.9743808

>>9743744
But surely as the controlling party, you could simply vote to have all profit "reinvested" by purchasing products from your other company, thereby siphoning 100% of dividends into your own pocket?

>> No.9743979

>>9743808
this

>> No.9743991

>>9743808
No you could not do this. There's an entire section of law devoted to stopping stuff like this.

>> No.9743993

>>9743808
I'm pretty sure it's been tried before and I'm pretty sure it's been settled in courts a long time ago.

>> No.9744000

To show the other rich fat cats who swangs the biggest dick

>> No.9744005

>>9743369
This most probably counts as criminal activity and you'll get sued by the other investors.

>> No.9744067

>>9743369
Firstly because you can't just take 100% of a company's assets just because you have the controlling interest - 49% of the book value of the company still belongs to the other shareholders and they will have a legal claim on it.

Secondly because companies often carry a lot of debt, even if you took over 100% of a company you also take on 100% of it's debt - should you choose to liquidate this company you 'get' 100% of the company's value MINUS whatever is owed suppliers, bond holders, bank loans etc. Often it is better to only own a controlling interest in a company, but it remains a separate legal entity with it's own liabilities separate from yours.