Business
Men in A Meeting
(Getty Images)

IPOs slow? Invent your own private stock market!

Welcome to the startup stock market

I have written, a few times now, about how a slowdown in private equity exits has been putting pressure on funds that need to return capital to their investors, with some funds now loading their companies with debt to help pay for dividends to distribute cash. Venture capital has been facing a similar bottleneck. A sluggish IPO market and a growing number of companies staying private has made it more difficult for VC funds to exit positions and return capital to their investors. But now, some venture funds are providing a solution to the problem by offering to buy shares from other investors at a discount. From The Financial Times:

The venture capital group G Squared has raised $1.1bn for its latest fund to capitalise on growing investor demand for its strategy of buying pre-existing stakes in start-ups.

Founded in 2011 and based in Chicago, G Squared has backed technology groups such as artificial intelligence company Anthropic and cyber security specialist Wiz.

While typical venture capitalists focus on buying new shares in start-ups, G Squared invests most of its funds in existing shares, bought directly from start-up employees and investors who want to sell some of their holdings.

Larry Aschebrook, the founder and managing partner of G Squared, also told the Financial Times that “investors can buy shares in the secondary market at about a 30 per cent discount to company’s value, and at a 70 per cent to 80 per cent discount to the prices investors paid during the low interest rate-fuelled boom times of the coronavirus pandemic.”

In public markets, the price you see is typically the price you get, unless you’re buying or selling a multi-million dollar position. If Apple is trading at $230 per share and you want to buy Apple’s stock, you’re going to pay $230. Tens of millions of Apple shares trade hands each day, and they are easy to buy and sell.

In the private markets, however, the price you get is what someone is willing to pay. And the cost of liquidity is, according to Aschebrook, a ~30% discount to the company’s value. It’s honestly a genius move by G Squared. Venture funds typically have ~10 years to return capital to investors. A fund approaching the end of its life cycle with a lot of capital still tied up in private companies needs to sell, and there aren’t too many buyers in the secondary market for venture shares, so G Squared can effectively name their price. If, for example, there was a hot startup that was last valued at $5 billion, and it has a good chance of exiting via IPO or acquisition in the next few years, but some of its investors need capital, G Squared can now go in and say, “Hey, we’ll buy your stake at a $3.5 billion valuation,” and they have another ~10 years before they have to sell.

Basically, they’ve created their own stock market for private companies where they are one of the only buyers, and when you’re the only buyer in a market of desperate sellers, you can set the price. I suspect we’ll see more of these “secondary” funds emerge over the next couple of years.

More Business

See all Business
business

The Trump administration is reportedly planning a 50% made-in-America requirement for USMCA tariff relief

Qualifying for USMCA-related lower tariffs may soon require more US-made vehicle components, according to reporting by The Wall Street Journal.

The Trump administration is reportedly planning to introduce a 50% US content requirement for vehicles covered by the trade pact to receive lower tariffs. The content would be measured by cost, according to the WSJ.

There currently isn’t any US-specific requirement for those lower tariff rates, but in order to receive preferential tariffs, vehicles are must contain at least 75% regional content (components made in North America). Per Reuters reporting, the Trump admin is seeking to raise the regional requirement to 82%.

These reported plans are subject to change as the US negotiates USMCA terms with Mexico over the next few months.

Overall, Tesla will likely have the easiest time qualifying for any stricter requirements. The automaker’s vehicles contained the highest amount of US/Canadian content in 2025, according to American University research. Ford, GM, and Stellantis all scored lower.

Notably: the underlying government data that many domestic content measurements rely on intentionally combines US and Canadian components, so it’s difficult to know exactly how much of any given vehicle is specifically US-made.

There currently isn’t any US-specific requirement for those lower tariff rates, but in order to receive preferential tariffs, vehicles are must contain at least 75% regional content (components made in North America). Per Reuters reporting, the Trump admin is seeking to raise the regional requirement to 82%.

These reported plans are subject to change as the US negotiates USMCA terms with Mexico over the next few months.

Overall, Tesla will likely have the easiest time qualifying for any stricter requirements. The automaker’s vehicles contained the highest amount of US/Canadian content in 2025, according to American University research. Ford, GM, and Stellantis all scored lower.

Notably: the underlying government data that many domestic content measurements rely on intentionally combines US and Canadian components, so it’s difficult to know exactly how much of any given vehicle is specifically US-made.

business

The $640,000 Luce makes the average Ferrari look like a bargain

Put aside the shape; put aside the smoothing out of Ferrari’s iconic sharp edges; put aside, even, the calls from former Chairman and President Luca Cordero di Montezemolo to “take the Prancing Horse off.” On the grounds of price alone, Luce detractors might have a point.

By now, many of us will have read the criticisms of Ferrari’s first fully electric vehicle, as the Luce — which was unveiled to the world earlier this week and promptly saw the company’s shares crash out in New York and Milan — gets subtly shaded by competitors online and not-so-subtly shaded by basically everyone else.

What makes all of this worse for Ferrari is that, even by the luxury car maker’s notoriously high standards, they’ve slapped a pretty hefty price tag on the Luce, and the company’s CEO, Benedetto Vigna, has already been forced to defend the €550,000 ($640,000) price point, saying yesterday that it’s “fair to pay for innovation,” per Reuters.

While Ferrari’s cars have been getting more expensive of late, as recently as 2022, Ferrari’s average revenue per car sold was around $340,000. At nearly twice that price, this new electric model is obviously proving a little much (visually, conceptually, and financially) for many loyal and long-standing fans of the Prancing Horse to stomach.

Ferrari Luce cost chart
Sherwood News

By now, many of us will have read the criticisms of Ferrari’s first fully electric vehicle, as the Luce — which was unveiled to the world earlier this week and promptly saw the company’s shares crash out in New York and Milan — gets subtly shaded by competitors online and not-so-subtly shaded by basically everyone else.

What makes all of this worse for Ferrari is that, even by the luxury car maker’s notoriously high standards, they’ve slapped a pretty hefty price tag on the Luce, and the company’s CEO, Benedetto Vigna, has already been forced to defend the €550,000 ($640,000) price point, saying yesterday that it’s “fair to pay for innovation,” per Reuters.

While Ferrari’s cars have been getting more expensive of late, as recently as 2022, Ferrari’s average revenue per car sold was around $340,000. At nearly twice that price, this new electric model is obviously proving a little much (visually, conceptually, and financially) for many loyal and long-standing fans of the Prancing Horse to stomach.

Ferrari Luce cost chart
Sherwood News

Latest Stories

Sherwood Media, LLC and Chartr Limited produce fresh and unique perspectives on topical financial news and are fully owned subsidiaries of Robinhood Markets, Inc., and any views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of any other Robinhood affiliate, including Robinhood Markets, Inc., Robinhood Financial LLC, Robinhood Securities, LLC, Robinhood Crypto, LLC, Robinhood Money, LLC, Robinhood U.K. Ltd, Robinhood Derivatives, LLC, Robinhood Gold, LLC, Robinhood Asset Management, LLC, Robinhood Credit, Inc., Robinhood Ventures DE, LLC and, where applicable, its managed investment vehicles.