Peter Thiel Tightens His Grip on Palantir Ahead of Public Listing, , on September 29, 2020 at 11:00 am

By
On September 29, 2020
Tags:

(Bloomberg) — Billionaire Peter Thiel was a no-show at the investor day leading up to the direct listing for Palantir Technologies Inc., the data-mining company he founded 17 years ago. And no one from the company will ring the bell at Palantir’s market debut.Thiel’s absence from the Wall Street pomp belies the outsize influence he’ll continue to wield long after the company goes public. Thiel will have more control over the company than any other individual or investor group, and an unconventional voting structure will award additional power to Thiel and two other co-founders in perpetuity.Palantir isn’t the first company in Silicon Valley to use super-voting shares to cement control for its founders. Other tech leaders including Mark Zuckerberg, Snap Inc. Chief Executive Officer Evan Spiegel and WeWork CEO Adam Neumann were all given disproportionate control over their companies as they headed to the public markets. But good-governance advocates say that handing so much power to a limited group of people could undermine the standards of accountability meant to be enforced by the market, making it harder for smaller shareholders to exert their will in cases where they believe a company is being poorly run.“They set it up so Peter Thiel can still sort of run it like a private company and still have the advantage of being public,” said Michael Weisbach, a professor at Ohio State University’s Fisher College of Business who specializes in corporate governance and private equity. “They obviously want to keep control of this company and don’t want a bunch of outsiders.”Palantir has been unapologetic about its governance mechanics. Its CEO, co-founder Alex Karp, has repeatedly told would-be backers to pick a “different company” if they don’t like the way it operates.Few expect Palantir’s voting mechanics to derail the company’s planned public listing. This year, Palantir expects to take in more than $1 billion in revenue and, for the first time, turn an adjusted profit, excluding stock compensation. While Weisbach said that its valuation would have been higher without the tightly controlled governance and voting structure, there are optimistic signs about how public investors will receive the company. Banks have reportedly told investors that Palantir could start trading at a market valuation of almost $22 billion. Representatives for Thiel and Palantir declined to comment for this story.Palantir’s technology collects and combines ever-changing data streams into what it calls a single “source of truth,” which its clients can then mine for meaning and use to make decisions. Applications vary widely based on the customer. Merck KGaA uses Palantir’s software to speed drug discovery. United Airlines Holding Inc. uses it to optimize flight routes. And the U.S. government uses it for tasks including identifying roadside bombs in Afghanistan, catching tax cheats and, more controversially, locating people who entered the U.S. illegally for deportation.Longtime Palantir investor Eric Munson of Adit Ventures said that the company’s aggressive voting structure is necessary to ensure Palantir can continue to operate without influence from outside parties who disagree with its business. Some of the company’s work is politically sensitive, he added, and its voting structure will mean that the founders can pick and choose clients whose interests align with those of the U.S., regardless of investor pressure. “I like that there’s no ambiguity where the leadership stands,” Munson said. That reasoning has limited purchase with groups like Institutional Shareholder Services, a proxy advisory firm. “The problem is power without accountability,” said Marc Goldstein, the group’s head of U.S research. Goldstein cited Mark Zuckerberg’s control over Facebook as a textbook example of too much control accruing to one man. As a long-serving board member of Facebook, Thiel knows that structure well.“Palantir is talking about how different they are from Silicon Valley, and yet they are taking on the absolutely worst aspect of Silicon Valley with this,” Goldstein said. Palantir has always been tightly held. It has only recently started adding independent board members, and even the independent directors have close links to Thiel, the board chairman. This summer, Palantir appointed three new directors, including 8VC partner Alexander Moore, who was an early Palantir employee, and former journalist Alexandra Wolfe Schiff, who wrote a book called “Valley of the Gods” that was largely about Thiel. Palantir has said it would comply with Securities and Exchange Commission rules that it have a majority of independent directors within one year of going public. Currently, the company says three of its six current board members are independent.Even when it does add more directors, though, power will remain concentrated in the hands of a few people. According to Palantir’s SEC filing, three of the company’s founders—Thiel, Stephen Cohen and Karp—will receive Class F shares entitling them to 49.99% of the company’s voting power, control that will not be directly tied to the number of other shares they own. The structure is highly unusual but not without precedent, according to Weisbach, who said the Ford family set up a similar system more than 60 years ago at Ford Motor Co. That company also established that a percentage of the vote would remain with the family regardless of its financial stake in the company. Even without a mechanism to hand more voting control to the founders, Thiel would still wield substantial influence at Palantir. As the largest investor in the company, he will own 29.8% of all Class B shares, which give the holder 10 votes per share. Thiel owns more Class B shares than any other individual or entity, including Founders Fund, the venture firm Thiel founded. That group, where he still serves as a partner, holds the next highest amount at 12.7%.Thiel also has a stake in several of the entities that have invested in Palantir. Besides his involvement with Founders Fund, Thiel is an investor in funds managed by venture capital firm 8VC and in the merchant bank Disruptive Technology Advisers, which oversees Palantir backer Disruptive Technology Solutions, according to people familiar with the matter who asked not to be identified discussing private information. Henry Hofman, a corporate governance researcher at Morningstar corporate ratings firm Sustainalytics, said the net result was another unfortunate example of Silicon Valley founders grasping for too much control. “Anything that strays away from the one-vote, one-share structure, we see that negatively,” he said. For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.,

Peter Thiel Tightens His Grip on Palantir Ahead of Public Listing(Bloomberg) — Billionaire Peter Thiel was a no-show at the investor day leading up to the direct listing for Palantir Technologies Inc., the data-mining company he founded 17 years ago. And no one from the company will ring the bell at Palantir’s market debut.Thiel’s absence from the Wall Street pomp belies the outsize influence he’ll continue to wield long after the company goes public. Thiel will have more control over the company than any other individual or investor group, and an unconventional voting structure will award additional power to Thiel and two other co-founders in perpetuity.Palantir isn’t the first company in Silicon Valley to use super-voting shares to cement control for its founders. Other tech leaders including Mark Zuckerberg, Snap Inc. Chief Executive Officer Evan Spiegel and WeWork CEO Adam Neumann were all given disproportionate control over their companies as they headed to the public markets. But good-governance advocates say that handing so much power to a limited group of people could undermine the standards of accountability meant to be enforced by the market, making it harder for smaller shareholders to exert their will in cases where they believe a company is being poorly run.“They set it up so Peter Thiel can still sort of run it like a private company and still have the advantage of being public,” said Michael Weisbach, a professor at Ohio State University’s Fisher College of Business who specializes in corporate governance and private equity. “They obviously want to keep control of this company and don’t want a bunch of outsiders.”Palantir has been unapologetic about its governance mechanics. Its CEO, co-founder Alex Karp, has repeatedly told would-be backers to pick a “different company” if they don’t like the way it operates.Few expect Palantir’s voting mechanics to derail the company’s planned public listing. This year, Palantir expects to take in more than $1 billion in revenue and, for the first time, turn an adjusted profit, excluding stock compensation. While Weisbach said that its valuation would have been higher without the tightly controlled governance and voting structure, there are optimistic signs about how public investors will receive the company. Banks have reportedly told investors that Palantir could start trading at a market valuation of almost $22 billion. Representatives for Thiel and Palantir declined to comment for this story.Palantir’s technology collects and combines ever-changing data streams into what it calls a single “source of truth,” which its clients can then mine for meaning and use to make decisions. Applications vary widely based on the customer. Merck KGaA uses Palantir’s software to speed drug discovery. United Airlines Holding Inc. uses it to optimize flight routes. And the U.S. government uses it for tasks including identifying roadside bombs in Afghanistan, catching tax cheats and, more controversially, locating people who entered the U.S. illegally for deportation.Longtime Palantir investor Eric Munson of Adit Ventures said that the company’s aggressive voting structure is necessary to ensure Palantir can continue to operate without influence from outside parties who disagree with its business. Some of the company’s work is politically sensitive, he added, and its voting structure will mean that the founders can pick and choose clients whose interests align with those of the U.S., regardless of investor pressure. “I like that there’s no ambiguity where the leadership stands,” Munson said. That reasoning has limited purchase with groups like Institutional Shareholder Services, a proxy advisory firm. “The problem is power without accountability,” said Marc Goldstein, the group’s head of U.S research. Goldstein cited Mark Zuckerberg’s control over Facebook as a textbook example of too much control accruing to one man. As a long-serving board member of Facebook, Thiel knows that structure well.“Palantir is talking about how different they are from Silicon Valley, and yet they are taking on the absolutely worst aspect of Silicon Valley with this,” Goldstein said. Palantir has always been tightly held. It has only recently started adding independent board members, and even the independent directors have close links to Thiel, the board chairman. This summer, Palantir appointed three new directors, including 8VC partner Alexander Moore, who was an early Palantir employee, and former journalist Alexandra Wolfe Schiff, who wrote a book called “Valley of the Gods” that was largely about Thiel. Palantir has said it would comply with Securities and Exchange Commission rules that it have a majority of independent directors within one year of going public. Currently, the company says three of its six current board members are independent.Even when it does add more directors, though, power will remain concentrated in the hands of a few people. According to Palantir’s SEC filing, three of the company’s founders—Thiel, Stephen Cohen and Karp—will receive Class F shares entitling them to 49.99% of the company’s voting power, control that will not be directly tied to the number of other shares they own. The structure is highly unusual but not without precedent, according to Weisbach, who said the Ford family set up a similar system more than 60 years ago at Ford Motor Co. That company also established that a percentage of the vote would remain with the family regardless of its financial stake in the company. Even without a mechanism to hand more voting control to the founders, Thiel would still wield substantial influence at Palantir. As the largest investor in the company, he will own 29.8% of all Class B shares, which give the holder 10 votes per share. Thiel owns more Class B shares than any other individual or entity, including Founders Fund, the venture firm Thiel founded. That group, where he still serves as a partner, holds the next highest amount at 12.7%.Thiel also has a stake in several of the entities that have invested in Palantir. Besides his involvement with Founders Fund, Thiel is an investor in funds managed by venture capital firm 8VC and in the merchant bank Disruptive Technology Advisers, which oversees Palantir backer Disruptive Technology Solutions, according to people familiar with the matter who asked not to be identified discussing private information. Henry Hofman, a corporate governance researcher at Morningstar corporate ratings firm Sustainalytics, said the net result was another unfortunate example of Silicon Valley founders grasping for too much control. “Anything that strays away from the one-vote, one-share structure, we see that negatively,” he said. For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.

,

Instant Quote

Enter the Stock Symbol.

Select the Exchange.

Select the Type of Security.

Please enter your First Name.

Please enter your Last Name.

Please enter your phone number.

Please enter your Email Address.

Please enter or select the Total Number of Shares you own.

Please enter or select the Desired Loan Amount you are seeking.

Please select the Loan Purpose.

Please select if you are an Officer/Director.

High West Capital Partners, LLC may only offer certain information to persons who are “Accredited Investors” and/or “Qualified Clients” as those terms are defined under applicable Federal Securities Laws. In order to be an “Accredited Investor” and/or a “Qualified Client”, you must meet the criteria identified in ONE OR MORE of the following categories/paragraphs numbered 1-20 below.

High West Capital Partners, LLC cannot provide you with any information regarding its Loan Programs or Investment Products unless you meet one or more of the following criteria. Furthermore, Foreign nationals who may be exempt from qualifying as a U.S. Accredited Investor are still required to meet the established criteria, in accordance with High West Capital Partners, LLC’s internal lending policies. High West Capital Partners, LLC will not provide information or lend to any individual and/or entity that does not meet one or more of the following criteria:

1) Individual with Net Worth in excess of $1.0 million. A natural person (not an entity) whose net worth, or joint net worth with his or her spouse, at the time of purchase exceeds $1,000,000 USD. (In calculating net worth, you may include your equity in personal property and real estate, including your principal residence, cash, short-term investments, stock and securities. Your inclusion of equity in personal property and real estate should be based on the fair market value of such property less debt secured by such property.)

2) Individual with $200,000 individual Annual Income. A natural person (not an entity) who had individual income of more than $200,000 in each of the preceding two calendar years, and has a reasonable expectation of reaching the same income level in the current year.

3) Individual with $300,000 Joint Annual Income. A natural person (not an entity) who had joint income with his or her spouse in excess of $300,000 in each of the preceding two calendar years, and has a reasonable expectation of reaching the same income level in the current year.

4) Corporations or Partnerships. A corporation, partnership, or similar entity that has in excess of $5 million of assets and was not formed for the specific purpose of acquiring an interest in the Corporation or Partnership.

5) Revocable Trust. A trust that is revocable by its grantors and each of whose grantors is an Accredited Investor as defined in one or more of the other categories/paragraphs numbered herein.

6) Irrevocable Trust. A trust (other than an ERISA plan) that (a)is not revocable by its grantors, (b) has in excess of $5 million of assets, (c) was not formed for the specific purpose of acquiring an interest, and (d) is directed by a person who has such knowledge and experience in financial and business matters that such person is capable of evaluating the merits and risks of an investment in the Trust.

7) IRA or Similar Benefit Plan. An IRA, Keogh or similar benefit plan that covers only a single natural person who is an Accredited Investor, as defined in one or more of the other categories/paragraphs numbered herein.

8) Participant-Directed Employee Benefit Plan Account. A participant-directed employee benefit plan investing at the direction of, and for the account of, a participant who is an Accredited Investor, as that term is defined in one or more of the other categories/paragraphs numbered herein.

9) Other ERISA Plan. An employee benefit plan within the meaning of Title I of the ERISA Act other than a participant-directed plan with total assets in excess of $5 million or for which investment decisions (including the decision to purchase an interest) are made by a bank, registered investment adviser, savings and loan association, or insurance company.

10) Government Benefit Plan. A plan established and maintained by a state, municipality, or any agency of a state or municipality, for the benefit of its employees, with total assets in excess of $5 million.

11) Non-Profit Entity. An organization described in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, with total assets in excess of $5 million (including endowment, annuity and life income funds), as shown by the organization’s most recent audited financial statements.

12) A bank, as defined in Section 3(a)(2) of the Securities Act (whether acting for its own account or in a fiduciary capacity).

13) A savings and loan association or similar institution, as defined in Section 3(a)(5)(A) of the Securities Act (whether acting for its own account or in a fiduciary capacity).

14) A broker-dealer registered under the Exchange Act.

15) An insurance company, as defined in Section 2(13) of the Securities Act.

16) A “business development company,” as defined in Section 2(a)(48) of the Investment Company Act.

17) A small business investment company licensed under Section 301 (c) or (d) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958.

18) A “private business development company” as defined in Section 202(a)(22) of the Advisers Act.

19) Executive Officer or Director. A natural person who is an executive officer, director or general partner of the Partnership or the General Partner, and is an Accredited Investor as that term is defined in one or more of the categories/paragraphs numbered herein.

20) Entity Owned Entirely By Accredited Investors. A corporation, partnership, private investment company or similar entity each of whose equity owners is a natural person who is an Accredited Investor, as that term is defined in one or more of the categories/paragraphs numbered herein.

Please read the notice above and check the box below to continue.

Singapore

168 Robinson Road
#12-01 Capital Tower
Singapore 068912

New York

Coming Soon!

Dubai

Coming Soon!

Market Coverage