• hubobes@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    I will never understand how leveraged buyouts are legal. I mean it somehow makes sense in its original form where workers were buying out the patron but now it is just weird.

    Edit: No this is actually fine if you think about it, it just feels wrong somehow.

      • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        They should only be able to use their own capital for the loan, not the company they are buying putting up the majority of the capital. That’s the problem with leveraged buyouts: you’re effectively putting the company up for liquidation when that happens, because the buyer is likely going to gut and shutter the company so they end up with a profit in the end.

        Ask Toys R Us about the process.

      • hubobes@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        I just feels weird that you can use the value of the company you buy to buy said company. It just “feels” weird that you can get a loan and use whatever you buy as leverage.

        Now that I am typing that out that is not really different from getting a loan to buy a house. Never mind, I guess it just seems weird when it is such an insane sum of money ¯\(ツ)