The bar for direct listings is not because of the model its because of the costs to go public and be public. Small cap stocks are not what they used to be, and it seems like some process for reducing regulation on small cap stocks seems like it would benefit everyone.
The very high bar for IPO (aka sarbanes-oxley, layers, bankers) is part of the 'model'.
Aside from expenses, there is a kind of 'stock populism' - big stocks get a lot of noise, which is a form of demand gen for the stock.
Companies with popular CEO's get a huge boost for example.
Both retail and bigger investors tend to prefer the bigger stocks.
This is part of the model which might possibly be improved.
We could adjust the taxation rules maybe, or, change listing rules, or literally just convince the banks that there is a huge opportunity in smallcap that's overlooked.
There are 100x mid-sized business opportunities for every big one - I see them literally every day.
I have told countless entrepreneurs that they have great businesses that are not suitable for VC because the growth and market is not there. And then what?
It's more economically efficient for them to nerd-out and compete for a 'Google Job' because they have all the power in the system.
Indirectly - there may be a bit opportunity with scale and regionality.
Large brands get a natural advantage in advertising as well, which doesn't work well for little regional shops.
I just bought a pair of winter boots on the high street out my door but totally by fluke - the are too small of an op to compete online.
There might be some taxation or international regs that we might want to put in place.
Perhaps I'm suggesting a bunch of adjustments that streamline financing for SMB and recognize the disproportionate power of conglomerates that it not always economically efficient. Often it is, but not always.
