It doesn't entitle you to profits, it doesn't entitle you to assets (except in bankruptcy), you can't eat it, and it's only worth what other people will pay you for it. Unlike a rothko, I can't hang it in my living room. Where's the value?
Of course it does. When the company is sold, you are entitled to the proceeds. M&A is the ultimate enforcer of equity value.
So in other words, your share is worth what other people will pay you for it. I already said that.
A whole-company sale is just an event where all shares are bought at once.
A single Google share isn’t really worth anything on its own. But its value is tied to the collective value of _all_ Google shares, which _are_ worth something.
Nobody is disputing that it has market value. My argument is that it has much less intrinsic value than some people would like to believe.
> A single Google share isn’t really worth anything on its own. But its value is tied to the collective value of _all_ Google shares, which _are_ worth something.
Not really, unless there's some non-zero chance that Alphabet will be bought out. By my understanding, that chance is pretty close to zero. Am I wrong?
The value is partly in Google, the corporation. Google is effectively a bundle of legal contracts, shared knowledge and habits that together tend to spit out money.
The rest of the value is in society. Laws, practices and habits mean that sliver of ownership tends to rise if Google works well, fall if not.
If you prefer to store your savings in whatevercoins, I hope you enjoy whatever you end up with on the other side. But please don't get back to me about it, I am utterly fucking sick of hearing crypto pitches.
I can't just vote in a dividend, because founders Larry and Sergey control 51% of the voting power. Shares don't entitle you to profits at all.
"Own" in what sense? You can't request them, you can't even vote for them to be spent in a certain way, and there's no guarantee that they'll be paid to you.
Someone once said this about NFTs but it also applies to the idea of Google stock as "ownership of profits" - it's like having a wife that you never seem to have time with, but you don't have to worry because you have the paperwork which says you are married to her.
> there's no corporate board on this planet that would accept indefinite stockpiling of cash, which is why buybacks happen, including for Google!
The board is appointed by voters. Those voters are Sergey and Larry. Sergey and Larry determine whether buybacks happen.