Back when Twitter Inc was founded the idea of super voting shares was very new and unproven. I don’t know why Ev Wiliams didn’t do that when he reset the cap table a couple years in to the company.
Discussion
That’s a decision made when going public.
The pain of few for the ecstasy of many.
Had we become too soft thinking about Barbie?
How it started How it's going
https://nostr.build/av/f7aa469affcdb586f8e8165aaa6227b54b892a10c753ed6a201c2e73c2e90e30.mp4
Yea, would have made sense pre-ipo. Too bad you only came back after that, Jack. And Rabble’s right - common shares are still common and preferred shares and not always preferred globally :)
And clearly by the time nostr:npub1sg6plzptd64u62a878hep2kev88swjh3tw00gjsfl8f237lmu63q0uf63m got around to starting Square ni Block, he’d solved that and setup super voting shares for founders. It’s become much more common in the last decade.
https://www.theinformation.com/articles/jack-dorsey-is-squarely-in-control
yea, you're right. i mean clearly missing dual class isn't due to Jack, he wasn't even there. But google, FB has also set that precedence before Twitter. So it sounds like Twitter internals wanted to remain conventional and I'm guessing Jack was too ahead of time? Also Twitter is diff ballgame, gov'ts and big players are important but they want control
Square is diff league - the ceo understood what was needed, hunted the pieces and put them together
(right co founder, early employees, right investors). Also understood the market and trust their people. Block has strong ppl
with differing opinions, but share a common goal of improving lives in
America and globally - and they are all exceptional.
So much of learning here