Because Proton has no venture capital investors, we can take this additional step to secure the future. Swiss foundations do not have shareholders, so Proton will no longer be dependent upon the goodwill of any particular person or group of persons. Instead, Swiss foundations and their board of trustees are legally obligated to act in accordance with the purpose for which they were established, which, in this case, is to defend Proton’s original mission. As the largest voting shareholder of Proton, no change of control can occur without the consent of the foundation, allowing it to block hostile takeovers of Proton, thereby ensuring permanent adherence to the mission.
Being a non-profit is only “unprofitable” in so much as it won’t enrich anyone. But they do usually operate in the black. The original owner(s) just aren’t interested in selling out/cashing in, so they have reworked the company so that all profits are reinvested into the mission.
Mmm…I haven’t read the article yet (will do!), but why should the owner of a profitable company make it unprofitable? 🤔
This is the important paragraph in the article
This is an unexpected benefit of being in Switzerland. Here I was thinking it was more or less a marketing thing
Being a non-profit is only “unprofitable” in so much as it won’t enrich anyone. But they do usually operate in the black. The original owner(s) just aren’t interested in selling out/cashing in, so they have reworked the company so that all profits are reinvested into the mission.