Is it better to own 1.31% of a $10.53 Billion company, or 60% of a $25 Million Company?

    Which is preferable? 48

    1. Owning 1.31% of a $10.53 billion company (34) 71%
    2. Effectively owning 60% of a $25 million company (14) 29%

    The last time I checked, Hybe's total market cap is 10.53 million.


    BTS members were awarded a whooping 1.41% of the company , but last year Kim Seokjin, Kim Namjoon and Jung Hosuk sold around 0.10% of shares altogether, leaving about 1.31% on the hands of the members (Min Yoongi, Kim Taehyung, Park Jimin and Jeon Jungkook own around 0.20% each, the other three slightly less.)


    Meanwhile, according to the financial statement of Kakao Entertainment released last year, Kakao owns $10 million worth of the stock of Edam Entertainment, for 40%, with the 60% effectively owned by IU through her proxies.


    For ease of calculation let's ignore the shares the three members sold last year and say each member still has about 0.20% of the shares.


    As of today, they own about $21 million worth of Hybe stocks.


    However, do they have a say about how Hybe is run?


    They would have some say, but they ultimately answer to Mr. Bang who makes the final decision, whether the members like or not.


    And he has spent a lot of money they had made on his own business operations.


    Meanwhile, the 60% stake effectlvely owned by Lee Jieun, about $15 million, is hers to burn.


    If BTS is like some mutual fund or ETF they would be happy about the returns.


    However they actually bring the majority of revenue to the company only to see most of it being frittered away on other projects.


    The effective owner of Edam Entertainment spends all of its revenue for herself. (It appears Shin Sekyung, who is the other figure in Edam Entertainment, has her own accounting and her own staff which the effective owner does NOT touch and their finances are not intermingled.)


    The greatest thing of having a majority stake in your company is you get to do whatever you feel like, without having to answer to anybody. That might be worth the $6 million shortfall of ownership which Lee Jieun, whose stake is worth $15 million, can feel over the BTS members, whose stakes are worth $21 million (less for those who sold their stakes), each.

    taylor-swift-eras-tour-via-variance-films-.jpg

    Edited once, last by WhyKnock ().

    Well it depends on the person,


    But artists supposedly value creative independence a lot.


    As Bill Gates said, once you cross a few millions, the burger is just a burger, can't be upgraded anymore. There is not much you can flaunt with the money.


    HYBE, HOME OF BTS, SURPASSED $1BN IN REVENUES IN 2021 – THE YEAR IT ACQUIRED SCOOTER BRAUN’S ITHACA HOLDINGS

    I would want a company that looks at the global market and can grow whatever percentage I own. $1 Billion Dollars in a Pandemic is pretty fucking unbelievable.

    Quote from merribelle


    HYBE, HOME OF BTS, SURPASSED $1BN IN REVENUES IN 2021 – THE YEAR IT ACQUIRED SCOOTER BRAUN’S ITHACA HOLDINGS

    I would want a company that looks at the global market and can grow whatever percentage I own. $1 Billion Dollars in a Pandemic is pretty fucking unbelievable.

    They don't own 1 billion dollars


    They own about 1.31% , or about $137.5 m combined, with about $21m for some members who did not sell, and less (it was not specified who sold how much but the combined amount sold was 0.1% or about $10.5m combined) for those who sold some stocks.

    Quote from WhyKnock

    They don't own 1 billion dollars


    They own about 1.31% , or about $137.5 m combined, with about $21m for some members who did not sell, and less (it was not specified who sold how much but the combined amount sold was 0.1% or about $10.5m combined) for those who sold some stocks.

    I didn’t say they owned $1 billion. The company’s revenue was over a Billion. As stockholders their dividend income also increased along with the value of their percentage. Who wants to own a percentage of a stagnant company

    Quote from vecchia-canaglia

    I prefer to have control over the company, so IU is a better choice for me

    KPop has become quite corporate in the last few years. YG and Edam are probably the two last remaining important companies where the owner has an absolute control.


    YG is run according to the whim of Mr. Yang Hyunsuk, who 'nominally' left the company but still runs it thru his underlings. He is often distracted so he does not treat his acts well but at least he does run his company differently from others who operate like clockwork.


    Edam is run according to the wishes of IU, who (not including Shin Sekyung who is allowed to what she wants to do with no interference from IU), gets to do what she wants to do when she wants, which gives Edam an advantage no other company really has since she gets to set her comeback date, a liberty very few other acts in KPop has. (OF course if one is a no name indie one can come back when he/she has enough money to promote, but that's another story.)

    Indeed. Some people like to read Wall Street Journal.


    There are a lot of baseball fans who argue sabermetrics on baseball players every day. My post is like that.

    Quote from bbgc

    Well it depends on the person,


    But artists supposedly value creative independence a lot.


    As Bill Gates said, once you cross a few millions, the burger is just a burger, can't be upgraded anymore. There is not much you can flaunt with the money.

    Yes, and it appears Lee Jieun had seeked creative independence from at least the time she did Friday (early 2014) and got it.


    Same logic about owning a smaller company where you get to do whatever you feel like and play a Queen to your employees, or being a very highly paid exec in a big company owned by someone else.

    Quote from BubblePug-Pop

    I don't care for all the responsibility that comes with being a majority owner of a large company so 1.31% is fine by me. I suppose if I put more stock into legacy etc then 60% but it's not my thing.

    Yes it differs by person. IU wanted to become her own boss so she went that way. Eventually I think the BTS members will form their own companies, with some loose association with Hybe, but for the time being they are part of Bang Shihyuk's Empire.

    Pffttt....... What makes you children is when you make things as simple as music into something complicated. You don't get anything by know about which artist make more money or whatsoever. Rather than worrying about this thing, I do believe an adults who really involved in stocks and market will put their concerns on things that profitable.

    Quote from WhyKnock

    Yes, and it appears Lee Jieun had seeked creative independence from at least the time she did Friday (early 2014) and got it.


    Same logic about owning a smaller company where you get to do whatever you feel like and play a Queen to your employees, or being a very highly paid exec in a big company owned by someone else.

    It is more to do with the company structure/culture than big/small.

    Edited once, last by bbgc ().

    Quote from Bananapple

    Pffttt....... What makes you children is when you make things as simple as music into something complicated. You don't get anything by know about which artist make more money or whatsoever. Rather than worrying about this thing, I do believe an adults who really involved in stocks and market will put their concerns on things that profitable.

    A lot of people who engage in sabermetrics on baseball players do that just for fun, with no monetary benefits. It is like solving a puzzle.

    Quote from WhyKnock

    A lot of people who engage in sabermetrics on baseball players do that just for fun, with no monetary benefits. It is like solving a puzzle.

    Discussing charts is like Sabremetrics. This is further off the map.. but ok. After all fans discuss all sorts for things like tattoos and what not..

    And I think you are incorrect to rule out IU owning % in Kakao entertainment itself,

    It is as reasonable a speculation as her ownership of EDAM itself.


    Most these deals are stock swaps.

    Even assuming your speculations that iu owns 60% are correct (which there is no way to know), there is no real market cap to base it on as it isnt publically traded.


    The other problem in IUs case is that the ownership cant really be turned into money, its just a valuation on paper. Who would buy 60% shares of the company from the only reason that the company is worth anything to begin with? If IU leaves or something happens to her the stocks are essentially useless.


    While BTS is a huge part of HYBE they have divested and they are not their only source of revenue these days, HYBE can survive without a few members or even the whole group. EDAM basically doesnt exist without IU.

    your obsession with bts is something else


    IU is an incredible artist and individual and I hope so, you can realize that she can be praised without getting compared to bts or anyone else. and also that artist financial

    situation should not have any thing to do with their artistry.

    To be fair BTS may own less of Hybe but they still do have creative control. Most of the company earnings are majorly earned through their clout. Hybe will obviously put their well being first in order to keep them still signed under them. So you don’t lose much by going for the 1st option (BTW I assumed you are still comparing IU to BTS so I’m taking into consideration their impact and influence on their respective companies they belong to)

    maths aside


    the question becomes the first one is merely an investor with maybe some levels of control at 1.31% one might get a director's spot one might not...


    the second one is effective control over that company

    if you have 60%, you have controlling share.


    that company now is your micronation now.


    the power that comes with controlling share is not something to sneeze at. although because the king carries the nation, it comes with a lot of responsibility too.

    Quote from selfmate

    maths aside


    the question becomes the first one is merely an investor with maybe some levels of control at 1.31% one might get a director's spot one might not...


    the second one is effective control over that company

    Quote from Kataphract

    if you have 60%, you have controlling share.


    that company now is your micronation now.


    the power that comes with controlling share is not something to sneeze at. although because the king carries the nation, it comes with a lot of responsibility too.

    lol I accidentally copied you without knowing lolol

    Quote from selfmate

    the question becomes the first one is merely an investor with maybe some levels of control at 1.31% one might get a director's spot one might not...

    fun fact: because some companies hold elections and try to be fair about the distribution of power


    Engine No.1 holds 4 seats out of the 12 in the board of directors despite only owning 0.02% of Exxon Mobil because a lot of shareholders shared the same views as Engine No.1. People liked eNo.1's views and activism within the company.


    so they have a quarter of the power, despite owning decimal percentages of the company...

    Quote from Kataphract

    lol I accidentally copied you without knowing lolol

    great minds think alike

    Quote from Kataphract

    fun fact: because some companies hold elections and try to be fair about the distribution of power


    Engine No.1 holds 4 seats out of the 12 in the board of directors despite only owning 0.02% of Exxon Mobil because a lot of shareholders shared the same views as Engine No.1. People liked eNo.1's views and activism within the company.


    so they have a quarter of the power, despite owning decimal percentages of the company...

    ceteris parabis of course...I mean obviously there might be more going on behind the scenes but I think the OP was talking purely on the numbers game instead of corporate politics...

    Quote from selfmate

    great minds think alike

    :pepe-toast: a toast to that

    Quote from selfmate

    ceteris parabis of course...I mean obviously there might be more going on behind the scenes but I think the OP was talking purely on the numbers game instead of corporate politics...

    True. I bet most of us are also unqualified to talk about corporate politics on that level lol :sweatr:

    also I learned a new thing today, "Ceteris Parabis," (I had to google that one lol)

    Quote from Kataphract

    :pepe-toast: a toast to that

    True. I bet most of us are also unqualified to talk about corporate politics on that level lol :sweatr:

    also I learned a new thing today, "Ceteris Parabis," (I had to google that one lol)

    I like that term lol


    I remember learning about it at either university level or high school economics

    I find it really useful when talking about (let's just say kpop) when people use different metrics to compare different things...just throw in some latin!!! lol

    Quote from selfmate

    I like that term lol


    I remember learning about it at either university level or high school economics

    I find it really useful when talking about (let's just say kpop) when people use different metrics to compare different things...just throw in some latin!!! lol

    I might jump on the bandwagon lol

    when in rome...

    edam is not a public listed company?

    it is basically a company for IU, entrusted to her because the board members believe she can manage her own artistic direction and work closely with her own team.


    basically a division system like in JYPE, but with higher rewards to IU and her management team, where they actually get their own company, become their own CEO, and freedom with a chance to grow into a full-fledged entertainment company.

    Edited 2 times, last by ketchUp ().

    Quote from Kataphract

    :pepe-toast: a toast to that

    True. I bet most of us are also unqualified to talk about corporate politics on that level lol :sweatr:

    also I learned a new thing today, "Ceteris Parabis," (I had to google that one lol)

    With K-pop, a far better Latin term to use is "De gustibus non est disputandum"


    If people adhere to that, it would be far more a pleasant place.

    Quote from Spsnowflakes

    Meh, its similar to the "To be a Big Fish in a small pond or a Small Fish in a big pond?" discussion. And honestly there is no right answer to that.

    What happens is smaller fishes in big ponds are swept away. Few people remember the family of the prime minister after a few decades. However ruling family of a smaller realm , iike the family ruling Monaco, is still kinda relevant after generations.

    Quote from bbgc

    And I think you are incorrect to rule out IU owning % in Kakao entertainment itself,

    It is as reasonable a speculation as her ownership of EDAM itself.


    Most these deals are stock swaps.

    Whatever she might own would not be significant enough to have her a role on Kakao's management.

  • This thread contains 56 more posts that have been hidden for guests, please register yourself or login to continue reading.

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!

Register Yourself Login