Also, it has been said that Urbans "gesture" to the "needy" is not dilution. Technically, it is not dilution, but practically, it sure as hell is.
Before Urban gives shares away, those shares belong to him. Us shareholders know where those shares are, and we expect Urban to do what is right with them and what is the best for all shareholders (not just the "needy"). They are accounted for and Urban supposedly has our best interest in mind. If those shares are just floating around out there and are not accountable, there is no reason why they shouldn't be dumped into the float when the restriction is released. Why not? Individual shareholders have a right to do that and are expected to do that. Urban however, is expected to take care of this company, either by locking up his shares or by retiring them, or if he needs to dump them, finding a way to do it with least impact to the pps.
Therefore, I don't care what anyone is technically saying. Before Urban gives those shares out, they are accounted for and expected to stay locked up. After he gives them out, they are as good as in the float. Therefore, it is a form of dilution and I don't agree with it one bit. Is it illegal? No. But as a CEO of a company that we own, we have the right to be treated better than that.
Let's hope this whole thing gets cleared up and nobody gets any free shares. Truth is, there are no "free shares". The "needy" might get it, but we'll all pay for it.
Also, isn't it funny how the "needy" are made up of a bunch of people who have the resources to fly out to the races for a weekend and party? I don't know about you, but I can't afford that.
One more thing, can we stop calling Urban a genius now?
AI
