Latest news with #privatecompanies
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Individual investors own 32% of Intershop Holding AG (VTX:ISN) shares but private companies control 43% of the company
The considerable ownership by private companies in Intershop Holding indicates that they collectively have a greater say in management and business strategy A total of 3 investors have a majority stake in the company with 50% ownership Institutions own 20% of Intershop Holding AI is about to change healthcare. These 20 stocks are working on everything from early diagnostics to drug discovery. The best part - they are all under $10bn in marketcap - there is still time to get in early. To get a sense of who is truly in control of Intershop Holding AG (VTX:ISN), it is important to understand the ownership structure of the business. And the group that holds the biggest piece of the pie are private companies with 43% ownership. In other words, the group stands to gain the most (or lose the most) from their investment into the company. And individual investors on the other hand have a 32% ownership in the company. In the chart below, we zoom in on the different ownership groups of Intershop Holding. View our latest analysis for Intershop Holding Many institutions measure their performance against an index that approximates the local market. So they usually pay more attention to companies that are included in major indices. We can see that Intershop Holding does have institutional investors; and they hold a good portion of the company's stock. This implies the analysts working for those institutions have looked at the stock and they like it. But just like anyone else, they could be wrong. When multiple institutions own a stock, there's always a risk that they are in a 'crowded trade'. When such a trade goes wrong, multiple parties may compete to sell stock fast. This risk is higher in a company without a history of growth. You can see Intershop Holding's historic earnings and revenue below, but keep in mind there's always more to the story. Intershop Holding is not owned by hedge funds. Looking at our data, we can see that the largest shareholder is Patinex AG with 40% of shares outstanding. With 6.3% and 4.4% of the shares outstanding respectively, UBS Asset Management AG and Hans-Jorg Graf are the second and third largest shareholders. To make our study more interesting, we found that the top 3 shareholders have a majority ownership in the company, meaning that they are powerful enough to influence the decisions of the company. While studying institutional ownership for a company can add value to your research, it is also a good practice to research analyst recommendations to get a deeper understand of a stock's expected performance. While there is some analyst coverage, the company is probably not widely covered. So it could gain more attention, down the track. The definition of company insiders can be subjective and does vary between jurisdictions. Our data reflects individual insiders, capturing board members at the very least. Management ultimately answers to the board. However, it is not uncommon for managers to be executive board members, especially if they are a founder or the CEO. Most consider insider ownership a positive because it can indicate the board is well aligned with other shareholders. However, on some occasions too much power is concentrated within this group. We can see that insiders own shares in Intershop Holding AG. This is a big company, so it is good to see this level of alignment. Insiders own CHF65m worth of shares (at current prices). If you would like to explore the question of insider alignment, you can click here to see if insiders have been buying or selling. The general public, who are usually individual investors, hold a 32% stake in Intershop Holding. While this group can't necessarily call the shots, it can certainly have a real influence on how the company is run. It seems that Private Companies own 43%, of the Intershop Holding stock. It might be worth looking deeper into this. If related parties, such as insiders, have an interest in one of these private companies, that should be disclosed in the annual report. Private companies may also have a strategic interest in the company. While it is well worth considering the different groups that own a company, there are other factors that are even more important. Be aware that Intershop Holding is showing 4 warning signs in our investment analysis , and 2 of those can't be ignored... Ultimately the future is most important. You can access this free report on analyst forecasts for the company. NB: Figures in this article are calculated using data from the last twelve months, which refer to the 12-month period ending on the last date of the month the financial statement is dated. This may not be consistent with full year annual report figures. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
The Guardian
6 days ago
- Science
- The Guardian
Large language models that power AI should be publicly owned
Large language models (LLMs) have rapidly entered the landscape of historical research. Their capacity to process, annotate and generate texts is transforming scholarly workflows. Yet historians are uniquely positioned to ask a deeper question – who owns the tools that shape our understanding of the past? Most powerful LLMs today are developed by private companies. While their investments are significant, their goals – focused on profit, platform growth or intellectual property control – rarely align with the values of historical scholarship: transparency, reproducibility, accessibility and cultural diversity. This raises serious concerns on a) opacity: we often lack insight into training data and embedded biases, b) instability: access terms and capabilities may change without notice, and c) inequity: many researchers, especially in less-resourced contexts, are excluded. It is time to build public, open-access LLMs for the humanities – trained on curated, multilingual, historically grounded corpuses from our libraries, museums and archives. These models must be transparent, accountable to academic communities and supported by public funding. Building such infrastructure is challenging but crucial. Just as we would not outsource national archives or school curriculums to private firms, we should not entrust them with our most powerful interpretive technologies. The humanities have a responsibility – and an opportunity – to create culturally aware, academically grounded artificial intelligence. Let us not only use LLMs responsibly but also own them responsibly. Scholarly integrity and the future of public knowledge may depend on Dr Matteo VallerianiMax Planck Institute for the History of Science, Berlin, Germany Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
Yahoo
25-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited's (SGX:O39) top owners are retail investors with 54% stake, while 23% is held by private companies
Oversea-Chinese Banking's significant retail investors ownership suggests that the key decisions are influenced by shareholders from the larger public The top 25 shareholders own 42% of the company 22% of Oversea-Chinese Banking is held by Institutions Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. To get a sense of who is truly in control of Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited (SGX:O39), it is important to understand the ownership structure of the business. And the group that holds the biggest piece of the pie are retail investors with 54% ownership. In other words, the group stands to gain the most (or lose the most) from their investment into the company. Meanwhile, private companies make up 23% of the company's shareholders. Let's take a closer look to see what the different types of shareholders can tell us about Oversea-Chinese Banking. View our latest analysis for Oversea-Chinese Banking Many institutions measure their performance against an index that approximates the local market. So they usually pay more attention to companies that are included in major indices. Oversea-Chinese Banking already has institutions on the share registry. Indeed, they own a respectable stake in the company. This implies the analysts working for those institutions have looked at the stock and they like it. But just like anyone else, they could be wrong. When multiple institutions own a stock, there's always a risk that they are in a 'crowded trade'. When such a trade goes wrong, multiple parties may compete to sell stock fast. This risk is higher in a company without a history of growth. You can see Oversea-Chinese Banking's historic earnings and revenue below, but keep in mind there's always more to the story. We note that hedge funds don't have a meaningful investment in Oversea-Chinese Banking. Our data shows that Selat (Pte) Limited is the largest shareholder with 14% of shares outstanding. Meanwhile, the second and third largest shareholders, hold 4.2% and 3.5%, of the shares outstanding, respectively. On studying our ownership data, we found that 25 of the top shareholders collectively own less than 50% of the share register, implying that no single individual has a majority interest. Researching institutional ownership is a good way to gauge and filter a stock's expected performance. The same can be achieved by studying analyst sentiments. There are plenty of analysts covering the stock, so it might be worth seeing what they are forecasting, too. The definition of company insiders can be subjective and does vary between jurisdictions. Our data reflects individual insiders, capturing board members at the very least. Company management run the business, but the CEO will answer to the board, even if he or she is a member of it. Most consider insider ownership a positive because it can indicate the board is well aligned with other shareholders. However, on some occasions too much power is concentrated within this group. Our data suggests that insiders own under 1% of Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited in their own names. However, it's possible that insiders might have an indirect interest through a more complex structure. Being so large, we would not expect insiders to own a large proportion of the stock. Collectively, they own S$223m of stock. It is always good to see at least some insider ownership, but it might be worth checking if those insiders have been selling. The general public, who are usually individual investors, hold a substantial 54% stake in Oversea-Chinese Banking, suggesting it is a fairly popular stock. With this amount of ownership, retail investors can collectively play a role in decisions that affect shareholder returns, such as dividend policies and the appointment of directors. They can also exercise the power to vote on acquisitions or mergers that may not improve profitability. It seems that Private Companies own 23%, of the Oversea-Chinese Banking stock. Private companies may be related parties. Sometimes insiders have an interest in a public company through a holding in a private company, rather than in their own capacity as an individual. While it's hard to draw any broad stroke conclusions, it is worth noting as an area for further research. While it is well worth considering the different groups that own a company, there are other factors that are even more important. For instance, we've identified 1 warning sign for Oversea-Chinese Banking that you should be aware of. But ultimately it is the future, not the past, that will determine how well the owners of this business will do. Therefore we think it advisable to take a look at this free report showing whether analysts are predicting a brighter future. NB: Figures in this article are calculated using data from the last twelve months, which refer to the 12-month period ending on the last date of the month the financial statement is dated. This may not be consistent with full year annual report figures. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
IOI Corporation Berhad's (KLSE:IOICORP) largest shareholders are private companies with 53% ownership, institutions own 34%
The considerable ownership by private companies in IOI Corporation Berhad indicates that they collectively have a greater say in management and business strategy Progressive Holdings Sdn. Bhd. owns 50% of the company Institutional ownership in IOI Corporation Berhad is 34% Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. To get a sense of who is truly in control of IOI Corporation Berhad (KLSE:IOICORP), it is important to understand the ownership structure of the business. And the group that holds the biggest piece of the pie are private companies with 53% ownership. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk). And institutions on the other hand have a 34% ownership in the company. Generally speaking, as a company grows, institutions will increase their ownership. Conversely, insiders often decrease their ownership over time. Let's delve deeper into each type of owner of IOI Corporation Berhad, beginning with the chart below. View our latest analysis for IOI Corporation Berhad Many institutions measure their performance against an index that approximates the local market. So they usually pay more attention to companies that are included in major indices. IOI Corporation Berhad already has institutions on the share registry. Indeed, they own a respectable stake in the company. This suggests some credibility amongst professional investors. But we can't rely on that fact alone since institutions make bad investments sometimes, just like everyone does. When multiple institutions own a stock, there's always a risk that they are in a 'crowded trade'. When such a trade goes wrong, multiple parties may compete to sell stock fast. This risk is higher in a company without a history of growth. You can see IOI Corporation Berhad's historic earnings and revenue below, but keep in mind there's always more to the story. We note that hedge funds don't have a meaningful investment in IOI Corporation Berhad. Progressive Holdings Sdn. Bhd. is currently the largest shareholder, with 50% of shares outstanding. This essentially means that they have extensive influence, if not outright control, over the future of the corporation. Meanwhile, the second and third largest shareholders, hold 14% and 7.9%, of the shares outstanding, respectively. While it makes sense to study institutional ownership data for a company, it also makes sense to study analyst sentiments to know which way the wind is blowing. There are plenty of analysts covering the stock, so it might be worth seeing what they are forecasting, too. The definition of an insider can differ slightly between different countries, but members of the board of directors always count. Company management run the business, but the CEO will answer to the board, even if he or she is a member of it. Insider ownership is positive when it signals leadership are thinking like the true owners of the company. However, high insider ownership can also give immense power to a small group within the company. This can be negative in some circumstances. Our data suggests that insiders own under 1% of IOI Corporation Berhad in their own names. However, it's possible that insiders might have an indirect interest through a more complex structure. It is a pretty big company, so it would be possible for board members to own a meaningful interest in the company, without owning much of a proportional interest. In this case, they own around RM183m worth of shares (at current prices). It is always good to see at least some insider ownership, but it might be worth checking if those insiders have been selling. With a 12% ownership, the general public, mostly comprising of individual investors, have some degree of sway over IOI Corporation Berhad. While this size of ownership may not be enough to sway a policy decision in their favour, they can still make a collective impact on company policies. We can see that Private Companies own 53%, of the shares on issue. Private companies may be related parties. Sometimes insiders have an interest in a public company through a holding in a private company, rather than in their own capacity as an individual. While it's hard to draw any broad stroke conclusions, it is worth noting as an area for further research. While it is well worth considering the different groups that own a company, there are other factors that are even more important. Consider risks, for instance. Every company has them, and we've spotted 1 warning sign for IOI Corporation Berhad you should know about. If you would prefer discover what analysts are predicting in terms of future growth, do not miss this free report on analyst forecasts. NB: Figures in this article are calculated using data from the last twelve months, which refer to the 12-month period ending on the last date of the month the financial statement is dated. This may not be consistent with full year annual report figures. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Fast Company
19-05-2025
- Science
- Fast Company
What the wins and losses for 2025 lunar exploration mean for the future
Half a century after the Apollo astronauts left the last bootprints in lunar dust, the Moon has once again become a destination of fierce ambition and delicate engineering. This time, it's not just superpowers racing to plant flags, but also private companies, multinational partnerships and robotic scouts aiming to unlock the Moon's secrets and lay the groundwork for future human return. So far in 2025, lunar exploration has surged forward. Several notable missions have launched toward or landed on the Moon. Each has navigated the long journey through space and the even trickier descent to the Moon's surface or into orbit with varying degrees of success. Together, these missions reflect both the promise and difficulty of returning to the Moon in this new space race defined by innovation, competition and collaboration. As an aerospace engineer specializing in guidance, navigation and control technologies, I'm deeply interested in how each mission – whether successful or not – adds to scientists' collective understanding. These missions can help engineers learn to navigate the complexities of space, operate in hostile lunar environments and steadily advance toward a sustainable human presence on the Moon. Why is landing on the Moon so hard? Lunar exploration remains one of the most technically demanding frontiers in modern spaceflight. Choosing a landing site involves complex trade-offs between scientific interest, terrain safety and Sun exposure. The lunar south pole is an especially attractive area, as it could contain water in the form of ice in shadowed craters, a critical resource for future missions. Other sites may hold clues about volcanic activity on the Moon or the solar system's early history. Each mission trajectory must be calculated with precision to make sure the craft arrives and descends at the right time and place. Engineers must account for the Moon's constantly changing position in its orbit around Earth, the timing of launch windows and the gravitational forces acting on the spacecraft throughout its journey. They also need to carefully plan the spacecraft's path so that it arrives at the right angle and speed for a safe approach. Even small miscalculations early on can lead to major errors in landing location – or a missed opportunity entirely. Once on the surface, the landers need to survive extreme swings in temperature – from highs over 250 degrees Fahrenheit (121 degrees Celsius) in daylight down to lows of -208 F (-133 C) at night – as well as dust, radiation and delayed communication with Earth. The spacecraft's power systems, heat control, landing legs and communication links must all function perfectly. Meanwhile, these landers must avoid hazardous terrain and rely on sunlight to power their instruments and recharge their batteries. These challenges help explain why many landers have crashed or experienced partial failures, even though the technology has come a long way since the Apollo era. Commercial companies face the same technical hurdles as government agencies but often with tighter budgets, smaller teams and less heritage hardware. Unlike government missions, which can draw on decades of institutional experience and infrastructure, many commercial lunar efforts are navigating these challenges for the first time. Successful landings and hard lessons for CLPS Several lunar missions launched this year belong to NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program. CLPS is an initiative that contracts private companies to deliver science and technology payloads to the Moon. Its aim is to accelerate exploration while lowering costs and encouraging commercial innovation. The first Moon mission of 2025, Firefly Aerospace's Blue Ghost Mission 1, launched in January and successfully landed in early March. The lander survived the harsh lunar day and transmitted data for nearly two weeks before losing power during the freezing lunar night – a typical operational limit for most unheated lunar landers. Blue Ghost demonstrated how commercial landers can shoulder critical parts of NASA's Artemis program, which aims to return astronauts to the Moon later this decade. The second CLPS launch of the year, Intuitive Machines' IM-2 mission, launched in late February. It targeted a scientifically intriguing site near the Moon's south pole region. The Nova-C lander, named Athena, touched down on March 6 close to the south pole. However, during the landing process, Athena tipped over. Since it landed on its side in a crater with uneven terrain, it couldn't deploy its solar panels to generate power, which ended the mission early. While Athena's tipped-over landing meant it couldn't do all the scientific explorations it had planned, the data it returned is still valuable for understanding how future landers can avoid similar fates on the rugged polar terrain. Not all lunar missions need to land. NASA's Lunar Trailblazer, a small lunar orbiter launched in February alongside IM-2, was intended to orbit the Moon and map the form, abundance and distribution of water in the form of ice, especially in shadowed craters near the poles. Shortly after launch, however, NASA lost contact with the spacecraft. Engineers suspect the spacecraft may have experienced a power issue, potentially leaving its batteries depleted. NASA is continuing recovery efforts, hoping that the spacecraft's solar panels may recharge in May and June. Ongoing and future missions Launched on the same day as the Blue Ghost mission in January, Japanese company ispace's Hakuto-R Mission 2 (Resilience) is on its way to the Moon and has successfully entered lunar orbit. The lander carried out a successful flyby of the Moon on Feb. 15, with an expected landing in early June. Although launched at the same time, Resilience took a longer trajectory than Blue Ghost to save energy. This maneuver also allowed the spacecraft to collect bonus science observations while looping around the Moon. The mission, if successful, will advance Japan's commercial space sector and prove an important comeback for ispace after its first lunar lander crashed during its final descent in 2023. The rest of 2025 promises a busy lunar calendar. Intuitive Machines plans to launch IM-3 in late 2025 to test more advanced instruments and potentially deliver NASA scientific experiments to the Moon. The European Space Agency's Lunar Pathfinder will establish a dedicated lunar communications satellite, making it easier for future missions, especially those operating on the far side or poles, to stay in touch with Earth. Meanwhile, Astrobotic's Griffin Mission-1 is scheduled to deliver NASA's VIPER rover to the Moon's south pole, where it will directly search for ice beneath the surface. Together, these missions represent an increasingly international and commercial approach to lunar science and exploration.
