Everything falls…
(www.forbes.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (37)
sorted by:
That seems like it goes against their duty to yield maximum profits.
Shareholder responsibilities require constant "line go up" at all times. Making a decision that doesn't make line go up immediately will usually have them lose their shit, even if its a better long term choice that would make them more money.
Its why most corporations are constantly fucking around with shit that already works and destroying their futures.
This is an incredibly perverse system of incentives that ought to be dropped. How does one go about utterly destroying the stock market?
Either total governmental collapse by this point or a complete purge from the bottom up of the current group-think of economists running everything in the background.
The Fed will literally lose it's goddamn mind over the notion of us having a depression and do everything in it's power to prevent that.
Oh, and likely [REDACTING] anyone and everyone who has a MBA or listens to thier advise.
Reverse this terrible verdict: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.#:~:text=Article-,Dodge%20v.,of%20his%20employees%20or%20customers.
100% one of the worst moments in the timeline 2nd maybe only to removal of the gold standard
this didn't happen by itself. people with names and addresses made it happen.
The solution is for new companies never to enter the shareholder market.
Shareholder responsibilities require that you put the best interests of the shareholder first, but that's not supposed to mean you have to stick your head into every mousetrap you find along the way. If companies are being sued for not making shortsighted, self-destructive decisions that is a corruption of the intent behind the rule.
That is true, but the issues arises when you are forced because the shareholders themselves demanding you stick your head into a trap because they want that short term gain. Because they, or at least the board representing them, are doing more than just throwing money at it, its also their opinions and beliefs.
You may try to explain it to them, but its not always going to work. Because most of them will be the force behind things like "a new study from Harvard says more blacks equals more money, hire more blacks immediately" and anything otherwise is racism to get you ousted from the company.
Its the "out of state landlord" problem. When someone has a lot of money invested in something, but has no actual investment mentally about it otherwise. So all they care about is the money flowing, even if less money now means more later.
I saw an article around the 2000s ish about some shareholder suing microsoft. Because the 8 billion research budget could be "better" used on shareholder payouts...
The only public company I've seen that tries to combat stupid normies and gambling degenerates from fucking with its operations is Berkshire Hathaway. Warren Buffet made its Class A stock obscenely expensive (currently at $723,549.00 a share) so people who buy the stock would be long-term investors and have some skin in the game, and not just YOLO.
That said, Buffet did create Class B shares for normies to get in, but with drastically lower voting power (1/10,000th of Class A).