...why would you sell out of stock to help take out someone else? Player 1 just lost half his moeny on taht buy, which then someone else spent. Overall the price of the stock hasn't changed, it's just been shared between 2 people. That does not make it any easier or harder for you to get bought out, because players 2 could just have easily have saved up to buy the next stock. Being ganged up on would go just as fast or just as slow whether they sold out of you or not, because for the strength of the alliance as a whole the amount of money they spent between them for that stock does not change.

Unless I'm missing something here, it seems like there is no logical reason to sell stock to be able to give it to someone else, especialyl when that piece of stock prepresents  10% of the dividends. Any specific examples to show when this is a good move?

I'm ok with no buyout, I'm not for or against it. It's easier to gang up on someone, perhaps that's fine.

Didn't say it was a good move Gameslayer. But FFA in this game you'll often see people make bad moves that kill themselves and the person they're targeting. No need to provide more options for that. Also, I don't see much point in playing the original mode if it's going away, and multiplayer games in next_version being so scarce is what led me back to the current release. I'd love to see how much impact the changes in next version have on something like this, but that would require being able to find a game in that version.