If someone purchases a publicly traded company for $100 then they get that company, why aren’t they the owner of $100 plus the company (maybe minus some admin overhead)


This may or may not have something to do with the news cycle.

In: 0

The existing shareholders/owners are being paid in exchange for their ownership of the company, not the company itself

That $100 is used to buyout the previous shareholders, it doesn’t go to the company itself.

The ratio of money paid has nothing to do with value purchased in the company. In fact the payment does not go to the company, it goes to someone else who owned the share before you.

When you buy a stock you get one share. The value of the share changes moment by moment but doesn’t provide you with anything other than potential benefits of dividends and possibly the right to vote in corporate matters.

When you sell your share the price you get depends on the price someone is willing to pay the company has nothing to do with this transaction either.

Stocks that are initially issued at an IPO or additional stock offering are the only shares that gain money for the company.

It might be more or less than what you paid for it.

The $100 goes to the shareholders from whom they bought the company, it doesn’t stay with the company.

If Bob buys Sarah’s company, Sarah gets the money and Bob gets the company.

If Bob buys a publicly traded company, he buys it from everyone who owns the company. I.e. the shareholders (who all own their “share” or “portion” of the company).

So then the shareholders get the money, and Bob gets the company.