Uber S-1 - Hackdot

Re:Uber S-1 by JMTQp8lwXL on Thursday April 11, 2019 @05:26PM (#19639399)

Depending on the voting structure of shares, many funds will pass over a company. SNAP, for example, is only in 20-some ETFs: https://www.etfchannel.com/finder/?a=etfsholding&symbol=SNAP

Most people investing in Mutual Funds and ETFs aren't getting exposure to SNAP. That may be the case with LYFT and Uber as well.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Uber S-1 by leoromanovsky on Thursday April 11, 2019 @05:42PM (#19639540)

It's the case of SNAP and LYFT because they have ownership structures which don't allow mutual funds to invest in them. Uber has a normal structure; any fund that mirrors the market will purchase the stock.

https://www.recode.net/2019/4/11/18302102/ipo-voting-multi-d...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Uber S-1 by JMTQp8lwXL on Thursday April 11, 2019 @05:48PM (#19639602)

> Back in 2017, the private ride-hailing company got rid of its dual-class voting structure that had enabled its previous CEO, Travis Kalanick, to make a lot of bad decisions.

What an interesting takeaway. Certainly bodes well for the average Uber investor, but really it only happened because of Travis.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Uber S-1 by mckenna on Thursday April 11, 2019 @08:01PM (#19640546)

Thanks for that link. FB has a dual-class structure, but its owned by all major ETFs: https://www.etfchannel.com/etfs/?symbol=FB

If UBER gets into indices, that would be scamming hard earned 401k dollars of unsuspecting ordinary folks. Sigh... More hate for Silicon Valley when folks figure out

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Uber S-1 by JMTQp8lwXL on Thursday April 11, 2019 @08:52PM (#19640883)

Mutual fund and ETF investors have historically done quite well with FB.

[ Parent | on HN ]