Conflict of Interest, page-41

Ok, I must be speaking to some form of narc here or possibly Donald Trump himself. I'll refrain from stooping to such lows and stick to mature debate/discussion for the greater good of society.

You're saying there was value? With no evidence.

The true story of old management:



Disaster.

When an asset is illiquid, such as an unlisted company with thousands of owners, large portions of assumed value are automatically eroded as one can not cash out if theres no market to sell ones portion in. Sacraficing value may be the only way to speed up a sale. Also, there may actually be no way to sell at all, or the costs of selling may outweigh the sale price. - Mr. Lumin.

"Illiquid assets may be hard to sell quickly because of a lack of ready and willing investors or speculators to purchase the asset, whereas actively traded securities will tend to be more liquid. Illiquid assets tend to have wider bid-ask spreads, greater volatility and, as a result, higher risk for investors."

What I actually prefer is garunteed liquidity and garunteed possible upside over the thin possibility of some value and a garuntee of no liquidity.
Not to mention a company off market is controlled fully by management and they don't need to conform to the same rules as a publicly listed company. All respect or laws protecting small holders is obliterated.

No point investing if you can't exit. No point exiting if your percieved value cant be obtained. No posiibe exit, and no correct valuation, no point in investing full stop.