One point of note, there hasn't been an Alberta stock exchange since 1999. The Toronto stock exchange bought the Vancouver, Alberta and small cap option market form Montreal and merged them into one stock exchange called the Toronto Venture stock exchange.
Its head quarters are in Calgary but its computer are located in Ontario and its under IIROC supervision and rules. And the BC and Alberta government co regulate it but their securities commission rules aren't what's followed, its the IIROC rules that apply.
Which of course was from Calgary.
Ah yes, SNC-Lavalin and fraud, name a more iconic duo.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/snc-lavalin-trading-...
But, agreed, that stock was a wild ride while it lasted!!
When the “overbearing regulatory regime” represents said company shareholders interests, you move to Texas where the MAGA vision of freedom reigns.
We have to thank Musk, even if he does crazy things. It is thanks to his crazyness that we have Tesla and SpaceX.
Without Musk EVs would be nowhere and NASA and ESA would still be the laggard they are with reusable launchers absolutely nowhere to be found.
It's way too easy to say: "I want all the good side of capitalism (like wealth and science advances) but none of the bad sides".
Starlink too btw.
There is no way to prove this without having the ability to observe all the other universes that have Musk and that don't have Musk. It's very likely if he didn't build these companies, someone else, or multiple someones, would have built similar companies.
He feeds off negative attention and actively seeks it out.
Laurene Powell Jobs?
Lisa Brennan-Jobs?
Liza Powel O'Brien?
The increasing amounts of envy and malice in American culture is troubling.
Aside from everything?!
I’ll bite.
1) He’s an individual yet his wealth surpasses the GDP of entire nations.
2) The market caps of his companies that informs that wealth are wildly and recklessly speculative. The company that innovated in its space is worth 1/3 of the company that has consistently oversold or completely failed to make good on promises(which frankly they all do regardless of their innovative effect).
3) And still, he’s currently holding one of his companies for ransom for even more.
> He built companies that provide breakthrough goods and services.
I must have misunderstood why his companies hired all of those employees.
Were they all just there cheering him on as he built it all himself?
This is a pretty absurd idea. The Tesla Model S, the Nissan Leaf, and the Renault Z-E platform (initially with a pretty unsuccessful car built on it; the successful Renault Zoe came the year after) all came out within a year of each other. The VW e-Golf came out the year after. You can thank progress in lithium ion batteries hitting a tipping point, not Musk, coupled with government incentives (California, the EU, and China were all pretty much saying to manufacturers "make this, and we will subsidise it").
I can see why people might think this, particularly Americans, because the Tesla Model 3 was arguably the first mainstream/affordable electric car _in America_ (the Leaf and similar vehicles never really caught on there; they're too far outside market preferences), but the idea that Tesla in some way made electric cars possible is simply nonsense.
Note that this is because of constitution reasons and areas of responsibility:
* https://www.canada.ca/en/intergovernmental-affairs/services/...
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalism
Every so often there's talk about consolidating things to a single SEC-like entity, but it has not happened at this point:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_securities_regulation
There is a non-trivial market for speculating on garbage.
If you're Texas, why not go for it?
This is exactly how it will end up being used for. Companies that are listed as OTC (over the counter) or “pink sheets” are most certainly dog shit; and often subjected to pump and dump schemes. The TXSE will be no different especially with reported “fewer regulations” than NASDAQ or NYSE.
This is great news for grifters. The average retail investor will likely end up getting shafted.
Now, if you're a less than reputable business, with questionable earnings and a disregard for following the rules, and you are ineligible to be listed on the NYSE or NASDAQ, which exchange are you going to consider?
Also, not being listed on NYSE or NASDAQ doesn't mean you're any less of a reputable company. There's some real shit listed on both.
I understand the desire for a different marketplace. But no matter where it is, they’ll still have to follow Federal securities laws, which will require some level of red tape.
Many of those companies are national or multi-national companies. For example, Exxon has its headquarters outside of Houston, but is actually incorporated in New Jersey (According to Wikipedia). So, for them, what would the benefit be?
Has a bill ever even existed to pass in Illinois? This idea seems to be brought up more as a scare tactic from the trading and business community than as a revenue generator from actual politicians.
Most of Ken Griffin’s work has been buying his family name on things and repeating anxieties about crime and (lack of) policing without actually providing solutions or even calling out root causes. But again, he’s not really a citizen of Chicago, nor the US. People at his level of control (his admitted price fixing, or moving trades to dark pools) have inherited and expanded on wealth to the point where they don’t need friends or social programs or infrastructure to live out 90 years on the planet.
If I were TXSE, what I'd be arguing is that the new market would have a benefit for new companies. Can you list faster with fewer requirements? Will there be capital available on the market? Can an IPO on their market be a replacement for later stage VC?
These are the companies they'd want to recruit.
It puts people in positions of authority based on their ethnicity, biological sex, and sexual orientation and therefore discriminates against others based on their ethnicity, biological sex, and sexual orientation.
But regardless of which state has the most at any given moment, even if 100% of Texas F500 companies decided to abandon their existing exchange and investor base for a more relaxed regulatory environment, that's...49 companies.
edit: another commenter points out that California reclaimed the throne in the 2024 list, released just yesterday.
As far as I can tell, there's some amount of movement to Texas for lower corporate taxes (especially companies led by executives like Musk or Ellison who prefer Texas's politics).
I would be surprised if any major companies delist from NYSE / NASDAQ in order to go all-in on a new exchange, although I could see, say, Tesla considering it if it was a condition for an attractive ticker symbol like T (NYSE symbol for AT&T, which is also headquartered in Texas).
And if Tesla is a trendsetter, TX might be seeing an influx of large companies. At least for legal incorporation.
But the question is: will they change their listing to this new stock market, or stay with the long-recognized ones?
its where you list that we are discussing here.
Listing on an exchange is all about what reporting requirements you are required to make inorder to be a publicly listed company and what share requirement you are required to maintain to list.
ie
- share price above a certain threshold,
- report your financials quarterly, etc.
- often a minimum trading volume
- certain requirements about the viability of the company, ie not bankrupt, etc.
Foreign companies will often dual list in the US to get access to US liquidity as well as list on their own home exchanges.
But once you are listed in the US there is no benefit to list on multiple exchanges as all you do is make your reporting requirements go up. Your shares can be traded on any US exchange once you are listed on any of htem.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/303696/us-fortune-500-co...
I think the economic growth of Texas is great for the US. States trying different models of regulation is a good way to test what works.
California has 57
New York and Texas are at 52
Source: https://www.gov.ca.gov/2024/06/04/icymi-california-is-now-ho...
As an aside, I do find it still impressive given the number of high profile companies that relocated, and the fact that there’s a constant news doom agenda against California.
All this to say, it’s a healthy reminder of just how much California matters to the US and global economy
Which let's the Texas of Canada, Alberta, run it's own stock exchange with much looser listing requirements and security requirements. This Texas exchange will not have that advantage.
The important aspect for Alberta within the context of Canada. Is how the local regulation allows the Alberta exchange to list and provide capital to junior drillers. Small companies which raise capital using ipos to use in speculative drilling. Alberta sees this as important for their economy. To the extent it prevents Canada from having a nation SEC like singular security regulator.
With that in mind, I question how a Texas based exchange will be more than a market for lemons. Companies too sketchy for the big exchanges might be interested in listing, but no one worth investing. This contrasts with Alberta where the difference in regulation allows a unique group of companies to list.
Instead we'd expect an exchange who's selling point is less regulation, to be filled with companies who cannot pass the higher bar. A self selection of the worst companies.