They most likely have dual trigger RSUs, so the second trigger is typically a liquidity event.
You are talking about single trigger RSUs with only time based vesting.
Also a 83b means you pay taxes at the time of issuance rather than vesting. If these folks received their shares post founding, that means that there might be substantial tax burden for them when they received these shares if a 83b was filed. This is why most folks do not opt for a 83b after a substantial FMV has been established for their shares. This is also why double trigger RSUs are popular, so you can actually execute sell-to-cover.
Effectively, its all just based on what indicators have a sufficient signal-to-noise ratio. If the signal-to-noise is high enough for any detectable behavior, then it can become a SAR.
You can absolutely have a public forum to share tips on how to stop this from happening. Just know that said public forum will be mined by money launderers and fraudsters and whatever work around is posted will most likely fail to work within months.
You have to imagine that the banking system exists in an adversarial environment with money-launderers and fraudsters. And instead of code that will always do whats written, the interface is a squishy human for a majority of these interactions.
I doubt there is truth to the common trope that "REAL rich people don't buy X/Y/Z". Its a No True Scotsman argument. In actuality, Kelly / Birkin are appreciated by a wide spectrum of people, even folks who are "0.1%ers". Just like "0.1%ers" buy luxury cars. Hell, Bill Gates (a "0.1%er" squarely) basically lobbied for a law just so he can import a Porsche 959. Jerry Seinfeld has a huge car collection. If you want to argue "old money", Prince Harry has a Jaguar E-type and a F-Type. Luxury goods are enjoyed by the leisure class, period, because they have disposable income and like nice things.
Yes wealth can be turned into power, but you know what already is power? Political power. Wealth is a counterpoint to political power. This is why communist systems become authoritarian, because there is no counterpoint to the power of the politburo. View xi’s crackdown on tech in China as a elimination of a potential competitor, just like his earlier corruption purges.
This is trivially easy: this home was sold in 2007 for 2.9m and was just recently solid for 1.8m 7 months ago. Top of market took a huge beating in 2007-2008.
The legal standard is material adverse effect. It’s a very high bar. As commentators have noted, it’s unlikely any court finds for that legal standard. This is why Elons lawyers have been using pretextual reasons to walk away. He is notably not saying he is walking because of “too many bots”. He is saying that twitter is breaching an information convenant because he needs to find a pretext that will stand up in the court of law.
"Canada is home to some of the world’s most admired and successful public pension organizations" and
"The core characteristics of the Canadian pension model, articulated in more detail in the next section, have been demonstrated to improve performance. Strong, independent governance is often cited by experts as a driver of outperformance. Inhouse investment management tends to result in improved returns after taking costs into account."
The pension funds all take a much more broadly diversified AND deeper approach than actively managed mutual funds. They are more akin to a Blackstone or Apollo.
Almost all of the top Canadian pension funds have better performance to benchmark over a 3 decade horizon including during the financial crisis, so arguably the proof is in the pudding so to speak.
There is a big difference in Canadian pension funds and US pension funds.
Canadian pension funds are run more akin to a private equity firm. They invest directly in growth stage deals and therefore take commensurate risks like any other private equity firm.
That means that they make bets with more asymmetric risks and balance their entire portfolio rather than staying at a specific risk band with all of their investments. They pay for professional staff commensurate with that model. A canadian pension fund's employees earn salary and bonuses comparable to a investment bank or private equity firm.
You can't necessarily look at one off investments and have to look at return over time which is generally healthy and their funding ratio, which is generally much healthier than US pension counterparts.
There is a reason the "Canadian Model" is held up as one of the ideal pension management models.
Canadian Pensions like OTPP are run more like private equity funds and they compensate their employees the same way in order to compete in terms of talent in order to generate deal-flow and deal identification.
Traditionally, this has meant above market returns and is one of the reasons that Canadian pensions are generally well funded.
This seems to be the “popular” narrative but the actual truth seems to be much more nuanced. Labeling the senate as a block for example misses a large part of it:
Yes but if you tighten nbbo by mixing retail and institutional orders, it by definition will still be worse than the retail market maker price, so end result is worse for the consumer anyways?
Anecdotally, western democracy was seen as a means to an end for many “common folk Chinese”. The end is prosperity. Now that the prosperity gap has drastically closed (also there are more clear paths to prosperity), the desire has also dissipated. China has also seen a China-like society in Singapore achieve a very strong economic and social outcome with authoritarian government, so western style democracies aren’t the only “role model” so to speak anymore
Two flaws would be to assume
A) the ccp is a monolithic entity
And
B) they have complete control over tencent et al. Some control isn’t complete control.
Factions exist in the ccp and having outside concentrations of power can lead to dangerous fragmentation that can also affect the internal politics of the ccp
It’s not really bizarre at all. Parents and therefore students care about rankings, and it directly leads to enrollment, donations, and talent attraction. There might not be changes in overall rankings but individual college or program rankings do change substantially.
The administration will all profess a desire not to be so beholden but it’s part of the game so to speak, you have to play.
Source: current board member of a public university college
There really isn't any weekly obligations when I went through, other than a dinner weekly. You met with the partners as much as you liked. At Demo Day, there were folks in 2011 with no product, someone even pivoted the day before demo day and just had an idea on a powerpoint. Some of the folks went on to build very successful businesses. So the lack of demo day progress in of itself doesn't mean too much i think. The other points might though, to be fair.
You are talking about single trigger RSUs with only time based vesting.
Also a 83b means you pay taxes at the time of issuance rather than vesting. If these folks received their shares post founding, that means that there might be substantial tax burden for them when they received these shares if a 83b was filed. This is why most folks do not opt for a 83b after a substantial FMV has been established for their shares. This is also why double trigger RSUs are popular, so you can actually execute sell-to-cover.