Bite-Sized Business Law

How do you put a price on companies that could reshape entire industries? Today on Bite-Sized Business Law, we welcome ‘the Dean of Valuation,’ Professor Aswath Damodaran, to explain the methods behind the valuations of large companies. Tuning in, you’ll hear all about how price and value differ, the importance of taking ownership of your decisions as an investor, how Professor Damodaran has valued SpaceX and why it has been valued so high. We delve into the wild valuations of AI and the effects of the technology on society, before discussing how to invest in an industry that might have no good outcome. Professor Damodaran even touches on the future of AI in law and shares his thoughts on how AI can be compared to the dot-com bubble. Finally, our guest shares his hopes and concerns for the future of technology and challenges listeners to rediscover their capacity to think outside the box. You don’t want to miss this one, so be sure to press play now! 
Key Points From This Episode:
Welcoming Professor Aswath Damodaran to the show. 
The difference between value and price, and his valuation of SpaceX. 
An explanation of how and why SpaceX has been valued so high. 
The potential problems SpaceX may face and the advantages it has. 
Why AI has as much value as it does, and the cost of use and production. 
Some detrimental effects AI may have, and how to invest considering that. 
The future role of AI in law and lawmaking, in our guest’s opinion. 
Professor Damodaran shares his thoughts on comparing AI to the dot-com bubble. 
Why he’s hopeful about the future, and what technological factors concern him.  
How Professor Damodaran’s teaching has had to change because of these issues. 
Links Mentioned in Today’s Episode:
Aswath Damodaran 
Aswath Damodaran at NYU
Aswath Damodaran on LinkedIn
Aswath Damodaran on YouTube
The Aswath Damodaran Bot
Another Aswath Damodaran Bot
Professor Damodaran's Blog Post on his AI Bot: Beat Your Bot
Professor Damodaran's Blog Post on his AI Bot: The Imitation Game
Professor Damodaran's Blog Post on his AI Bot: AI Scenarios  
Fordham University School of Law Corporate Law Center

Prediction markets are surging in popularity, allowing users to bet on everything from elections and military action to awards and celebrity news. But when traders have information the rest of the market does not, where is the line separating useful forecasting from unlawful conduct? In this episode of Bite-Sized Business Law, we speak with Joshua Mitts, the David J. Greenwald Professor of Law at Columbia Law School, about the legal questions surrounding informed trading in prediction markets. Joshua is the co-author of ‘From Iran to Taylor Swift: Informed Trading in Prediction Markets,’ which examines suspicious trading patterns across prediction platforms. Joshua explains how prediction markets work, why informed traders help them produce meaningful results, and when an information advantage becomes legally or socially concerning. He walks through case studies involving suspicious trading across national security, politics, major institutions, and celebrity news, and how confidential information can create major profits while also threatening national security, privacy, and institutional integrity. We also explore why traditional insider trading law does not apply to these markets, how the misappropriation doctrine may apply, and why anonymous blockchain wallets make enforcement difficult. Tune in to explore where prediction markets are heading and whether the law can keep up.
Key Points From This Episode:
Introducing Joshua Mitts and his research on informed trading in prediction markets.
Learn what prediction markets are and how their event contracts work.
How blockchain technology has made prediction platforms more accessible.
Discover the difference between informed trading and traditional insider trading.
Hear why informed traders are vital for prediction markets to function.
What made the trading before the U.S. attack on Iran seem unusually well-timed.
Explore why the case studies in his paper raise concerns beyond national security.
Discover how prediction markets can incentivize hacking and illegal data trading. 
Unpack why existing insider trading laws do not apply easily to prediction markets.
Why prediction markets make illegal trading difficult to investigate and prosecute.
Find out how identity checks and greater platform oversight could help regulators.
Uncover why bans are not the solution and what upcoming legislation would change.
Links Mentioned in Today’s Episode:
Joshua Mitts
Joshua Mitts on LinkedIn
Joshua Mitts on X
‘From Iran to Taylor Swift: Informed Trading in Prediction Markets’
Polymarket
Kalshi
Fordham University School of Law Corporate Law Center

The debate over ExxonMobil’s new retail investor voting program is raising important questions about shareholder participation and corporate power. In this episode of Bite-Sized Business Law, we examine ExxonMobil’s new approach to retail shareholder voting, which supporters say gives retail investors a stronger voice, while critics argue it could consolidate management power and limit the influence of activist investors. Christina Sautter, Associate Dean for Research and Professor of Law at the SMU Dedman School of Law, explains how the program is designed to address low participation among retail investors and how it works in practice. She discusses the promise of greater participation, while also examining why engagement may not actually increase, the risk of investor inertia, and the concentration of managerial power. The conversation also explores Exxon’s move to Texas, the implications for shareholder rights, and why other companies may adopt similar voting programs. Tune in for a closer look at one of the most controversial developments in shareholder voting.
Key Points From This Episode:
Introducing Christina Sautter and Exxon’s new retail voting program.
The challenge of low retail investor engagement in shareholder voting.
A breakdown of how Exxon’s new retail voting program works.
Discussing whether the program increases engagement or simply increases votes cast.
Unpacking concerns about shareholders voting before seeing meeting agendas.
Criticism that the program creates a permanent pro-management voting bloc.
Exxon’s response to criticism of the program.
The connection between the voting program and Exxon’s move to Texas.
How Texas corporate laws could affect future shareholder rights.
Why Christina expects other public companies to adopt similar programs.
Existing legal challenges and the future of shareholder democracy.
Links Mentioned in Today’s Episode:
Christina Sautter
Christina Sautter on LinkedIn
Christina Sautter on X
NYC Comptroller Letter
ExxonMobil's Response
‘The Shareholder Democracy Lie’
Fordham University School of Law Corporate Law Center

The recent changes the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has made have shaken up the public market in a way that could permanently reshape the balance of power between companies and investors. Today on the Bite-Sized Business Law Podcast, we welcome Walker Newell to discuss the SEC’s big reset and its effects on investors, businesses, and their advisors. In this conversation, you’ll hear all about Walker’s career, his time at the SEC, and his unexpected foray into D&O insurance. We delve into the shareholder proposal rules and how things have changed before discussing the SEC’s new proposal to end quarterly reporting and how Walker thinks companies will react. We then discuss the mandatory securities arbitration issue and what companies must consider before adopting such a clause. Finally, Walker talks about future developments within this area and shares advice for young professionals about how his time working in government informed and influenced the rest of his career. Thanks for tuning in! 
Key Points From This Episode:
Welcoming Walker Newell to the show. 
A brief overview of his background and his time at the SEC. 
Walker breaks down the shareholder proposal rules. 
What has changed within the SEC this year after the shutdown. 
Walker tells us about the brand-new proposal the SEC put out regarding quarterly reporting. 
What the Mandatory Securities Arbitration issue is and how companies should be thinking about it.
Finding a balance between shareholders and management. 
How Walker’s time at the SEC influenced his career. 
Links Mentioned in Today’s Episode:
Walker Newell on LinkedIn
SEC Comment Page for Semiannual Reporting Proposal 
Fordham University School of Law Corporate Law Center

AI is already reshaping legal work, but not in the way most people expect. In this episode of Bite-Sized Business Law, we speak with Francisco Morales Barrón, an M&A partner at Vinson & Elkins and member of the firm’s AI Task Force, about how he is actively using AI in high-stakes dealmaking rather than simply theorizing about its future. The conversation begins with how Francisco responded to early caution within his firm by taking the lead on exploring AI while also teaching a law school course on generative AI in corporate law. He highlights how these tools allow lawyers to go deeper into their work, not just get things done faster, while reinforcing the need for careful human review. As the discussion unfolds, Francisco explores the broader implications for the legal profession. He shares his perspective on potential displacement of lawyers, as well as the surprising opportunities created by AI, before breaking down the pressure AI puts on traditional law firm economics and how firm structures may evolve. The episode also covers ethical duties, client expectations, and how to rethink training for young lawyers in the age of AI. Tune in for Francisco’s firsthand insights on how AI is changing M&A from the inside out!
Key Points From This Episode:
An introduction to Francisco Morales Barrón and his work in AI and M&A.
How Francisco joined his company’s AI task force and what his work entails.
Their pilot program for different AI tools, and how they chose to fully deploy Harvey.
Details on how Francisco is using AI tools for specific aspects of his work in M&A.
The importance of human review despite improving AI capabilities.
How AI enables deeper analysis across contracts and deal materials.
Unpacking how AI could displace lawyers while also creating new opportunities.
Shifting attitudes among law students and younger lawyers.
Ongoing experimentation with AI tools and why firms remain in pilot mode.
Ethical duties and client expectations when using AI in legal work.
How AI challenges traditional billing models and law firm economics.
Concerns about training junior lawyers in an AI-driven environment.
Rethinking training: moving toward an apprenticeship model with more direct mentorship.
Tasks likely to be automated versus skills that remain human-driven.

Links Mentioned in Today’s Episode:

Francisco Morales Barrón on LinkedIn
Harvey
Opinion 512 | American Bar Association (ABA)
Unreasonable Hospitality
Fordham University School of Law Corporate Law Center