I'm amused by it. It's a transfer of wealth from shareholders of those companies to founders and VCs. These are also the companies with dual class shares designed to keep control in the founders' hands. They all say it's to be able to focus on the long-term, but really it has bred empire building and poor stewardship of the shareholder's capital. As a result, their interests are less aligned with shareholders' compared to if all shares had the same voting rights.

An exception to this is Apple. They have one class of shares and management have been conservative stewards for the life of the company. They never make large acquisitions, which limits the opportunity for destruction of shareholder value, and all acquisitions are made with the purpose of enhancing a product or some other core of the business. It's in the company's culture to have organic growth. They either have it or they flounder.