Does owning 100% of a good company have economic value, even if literally no one else wants to buy it from you?
If it does, why wouldn’t a fractional share of that company have the same quality?
If you owned all of Coca-Cola, Amex, Disney, or Tesla, anyone would think you were spectacularly well-resourced, even if stock markets didn’t exist or if selling portions of companies were outlawed.
What else would owning the company mean, if not that? You would have to agree proportionally with the other owners (of which there are none) on who to put in place to run the company.
Then it doesn't map with the present scenario. Because none of these companies have ever payed out a dividend and voting power is almost non existent too.
If it does, why wouldn’t a fractional share of that company have the same quality?
If you owned all of Coca-Cola, Amex, Disney, or Tesla, anyone would think you were spectacularly well-resourced, even if stock markets didn’t exist or if selling portions of companies were outlawed.