←back to thread

510 points bookofjoe | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
regera ◴[] No.46185157[source]
Dollar stores are private equity with a checkout lane.

In 2025, Dollar Tree sold Family Dollar to a group of private-equity firms: Brigade Capital Management, Macellum Capital Management and Arkhouse Management Co.

https://corporate.dollartree.com/news-media/press-releases/d...

It’s a business model cosplaying as poverty relief while quietly siphoning money from the people least able to lose it. They already run on a thin-staff, high-volume model. That 23% increase is not a glitch. They know their customers can’t drive across town to complain. They know the regulators won’t scale fines to revenue.

replies(17): >>46185182 #>>46185228 #>>46185328 #>>46185369 #>>46185506 #>>46185683 #>>46185730 #>>46185872 #>>46186098 #>>46186112 #>>46186250 #>>46187818 #>>46188387 #>>46190357 #>>46192019 #>>46194885 #>>46195965 #
sema4hacker ◴[] No.46185228[source]
Has private equity ever done anything good for anyone outside of the investors?
replies(19): >>46185374 #>>46185474 #>>46185536 #>>46185605 #>>46185618 #>>46185662 #>>46185700 #>>46185710 #>>46186450 #>>46186733 #>>46187823 #>>46188138 #>>46188268 #>>46188770 #>>46189870 #>>46190264 #>>46191097 #>>46191669 #>>46192442 #
WarOnPrivacy ◴[] No.46185700[source]
> Has private equity ever done anything good for anyone outside of the investors?

If it's not publicly traded, it's super secure from any public accountability.

And while I'm increasingly hostile toward the shareholder model, we do get one transparency breadcrumb from this (gov managed) contrivance: The Earnings Call

Earnings Calls give us worthwhile amounts of internal information that we'd never get otherwise - info that often conflicts with public statements and reports to govs.

Like CapEx expenditures/forecast and the actual reasons that certain segments over/underperform. It's a solid way to catch corporations issuing bald-faced lies (for any press, public, gov that are paying attention).

    AT&T PR: Net Neutrality is tanking our infra investment
    ATT's EC: CapEx is high and that will continue
I'll bet 1 share that there are moves to get this admin to do away with the requirement.
replies(4): >>46186060 #>>46187914 #>>46189896 #>>46194854 #
ineedasername ◴[] No.46187914[source]
>I'll bet 1 share...

I won't be your counterparty on that bet, you've already won:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2025/09/15/trump-wants...

One of the reasons cited? All the work it takes. Which is just an insane response. If your business is so poorly run and organized that reconciling things each quarter represents a disproportionate amount of effort, something is very wrong. It means you definitely don't know what's going on, because by definition you can't know, not outside those 4 times a year. In which case there's a reasonable chance the requirement to do so is the only thing that's kept it from going off the rails.

replies(3): >>46192777 #>>46193085 #>>46193634 #
randerson ◴[] No.46193634[source]
I rarely agree with Trump, but I'm a former exec at a public company and he's not wrong. You need a horde of lawyers and accountants and investor relations and SOX compliance people and auditors etc for the earnings reports. SOX adds burdensome processes at every layer of the organization. Your CFO and CEO will be preoccupied by earnings. It's a real disincentive for a small/medium cap company to go (or stay) public. A PE firm taking a company private can get rid of all this overhead on Day 1.

Not to mention, quarterly reports incentivize a company to focus on the current quarter instead of longer-term sustainability. Reporting twice a year doesn't solve all the above problems, but it sure would reduce them a little.

replies(2): >>46195582 #>>46195745 #
brookst ◴[] No.46195582[source]
Twice a year reporting also makes it easier for insiders to cash out before bad news becomes public.
replies(1): >>46198226 #
1. randerson ◴[] No.46198226[source]
Almost all insiders file trading plans far in advance as a defense against accusations of insider trading. Twice-a-year reporting actually makes it harder for insiders because they will have to file their trading plans further in advance. And it doesn't stop shareholders from suing insiders if they believe there was actual insider trading.
replies(1): >>46213612 #
2. brookst ◴[] No.46213612[source]
Wait, where in this proposal did you see a change in requirements around planned selling? My assumption, perhaps unfair, certainty supported by trends in US lawlessness, is that the whole scheme is to change reporting but not windows for planned sales.