Right but why would VCs want this? Wouldn't VCs value the liquidity of being able to flexibly enter and exit positions? I really wish there were a simple explanation of why companies don't want to IPO as early as they used to but there isn't. The closest I've found when talking to CEOs has been they don't want shareholders putting pressure on them for quarterly results and diluting the company's focus, especially when it's still growing and doesn't have a mature business.

I agree with you and the parent comment, but to be fair to VC, they're also assuming risk. For example, if Wework had IPO'd earlier the public would've been holding the bag instead of private investors.

That’s actually not why. It’s because of regulations put into place after Enron collapsed that made it harder and more expensive to go public.

Companies used to *need* to go public in order to either raise capital or because they were going to have to start publicly reporting anyways due to the number of shareholders.

The JOBS Act and proliferation of double-vesting trigger RSUs effectively negated these forcing functions and 'going public' went from a necessary growing pain to a burden and distraction.

It goes both ways. There are a lot of software companies that VCs poured money into that have turned out to be worth a fraction of the valuations.

Yeah, I have similar thoughts. If SpaceX's IPO has been a dumpster fire, and share price dropped to the third of its initial value, it would still have been massively overvalued, and made Musk much richer than if they went with a more realistic market cap, and let the market carry them upwards.

What if it's just because the numbers aren't that great at the moment?