3 ms·
Yeah, the "stakeholders" should get rich at the expense of the people that actually OWN the company. I'd love to see the innovation that would happen if this w
by forgetsusername 11y ago
Yeah, the "stakeholders" should get rich at the expense of the people that actually OWN the company. I'd love to see the innovation that would happen if this were implemented at scale.
>She tried with an impressive effort
That's one way to view it. I'd say it was a pretty expensive, unimpressive effort.
>rather they had listen to finance people
Uh, you realize that it's also "finance people" that have been standing behind Amazons rise as well, right? Just because you read a couple of articles on HN about activists wanting to see profits, in no way does that represent all "finance people". Amazon has a lot of shareholders. Like it or not, "finance people" aren't some homogeneous group of self interested, greedy trolls.
- nickpsecurity 11y agoYeah, the "stakeholders" should get rich at the expense of the people that actually OWN the company." Look up Publix or Costco for an example of stakeholder model working in low margin industries. Probably could work in high margin tech. http://www.forbes.com/sites/briansolomon/2013/07/24/the-wal-mart-slayer-how-publixs-people-first-culture-is-winning-the-grocer-war/#21aa00a07676 http://www.forbes.com/sites/briansolomon/2013/07/24/the-wal-... "That's one way to view it. I'd say it was a pretty expensive, unimpressive effort." Feel free to offer a different set of recommendations that would've turned it around.. "Just because you read a couple of articles on HN about activists wanting to see profits" Just discovered HN recently. Try most articles in the media and finance people they interviewed. People were either impressed with their consumer value or talking about how they were a failed business in the making. Rarely saw an exception when the name came up. Could've been some media bias that made it appear one way while real opinion of investors was different.