Nowadays, as the number of family businesses is increasing, people begin to debate over whether family businesses are more advantegious or not. In my opinion, family businesses keep more advantages because of their structure and difficulty to start or disolve.
Company structure of family businesses can effectively prevent control dilution. As traditional businesses distributes their equities to different external shareholders, original founder may loose his control over the company in the long-term. However, equities of family businesses mostly circlulate within the family, in which case the power of control is typically concentrated to a group of people sharing the same interests. For example, Steve Jobs was fired from Apple and lossed control because other sthareholders did not share enough interests with him. But in a family, as shareholders naturally and essentially have same interests, it is unlikely the same case.
Family businesses also typically have a low cost to start or liquidate. To start a new business, founder always needs to coordinate between different concerned parties, which generates additional costs. For example, as a founder of a traditional business needs to negotiate with different funders to define duties and shares, it may take a long time and raise opportunity costs. However, people in same family can easily complete this process by equally sharing risks and benefits as a whole unit. As a result, the additional costs can be avoided. When the company is disolved, families are also easier to come out convenants because they are familiar with each other.
In conclusion, based on the nature of sharing benefits, family businesses take more advantages structure and costs to start or disolve.