• explodicle@local106.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    The initial cost would be significantly lower because there’d be no previous owner to pay. Property values right now include the net present value of all expected future rents. The incentive to participate in the crowdfund is that the increased likelihood of the event happening is worth more to you than your share of money invested (like any other assurance contract).

    Compared to buying a percentage of the company, it eliminates unearned rent; nobody is getting paid more than it costs to bring the factor into production.

    Not all of them, no. Especially in 2020 many were forgiven. If it was a profitable endeavor (counting opportunity cost vs just investing elsewhere), then the private sector would have done it using collateral. And we’re still paying for those bailouts today [gestures at prices].

    • throwwyacc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’m confused, you want to have people crowd fund R&D to increase the odds a product goes to market. And then expect no profit on the back of that investment? After the potentially huge initial cost does the company then sell the product at cost? Or do they make a profit now?

      Can you give an example of a bailout you disagree with? Pretty much all bailouts I’m aware of recoup their costs Also the reason private equity doesn’t bail out these companies is that unlike a government they may not be able to weather a significant period where they aren’t getting a large cash flow, as they need to stay afloat as well. A government on the other hand is better prepared to recoup costs over time, and will do so if it means that depositors funds are safe. They are much more likely to let a hedge fund just fold as the participants are capable of withstanding such losses

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        R&D used to be done at universities for the benefit of all. It still often is.

        Why should it all be in private hands?

        • throwwyacc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Good luck moving literally all R&D to universities I guess

          I don’t think all research should be in private hands. But I don’t think it’s reasonable to assume we could move businesses to a crowd funding model and then somehow convince universities to do all of that R&D