right — agreed. I think the point I was trying to make is that if there wasn’t downside protection, they’d pay a lower price (by some %). And that “lower price” is probably what the common shares are worth. And so saying the price of the “preferred shares” ascribes a “value” to the whole company made up of more than just “preferred shares” makes no sense to me.
BTW thanks for responding — huge fan of some of your talks on product development/iteration etc.