3 ms·
As long as litigation is of a positive net present value (i.e. expected return is positive) then they have a duty to their shareholders to undertake it. It's ju
by CamatHN 11y ago
As long as litigation is of a positive net present value (i.e. expected return is positive) then they have a duty to their shareholders to undertake it. It's just the way of the world, its not like the CEO is taking into account this when thinking of 'the way microsoft should be' its just the state of tech innovation at the moment.
- rayiner 11y agoThat's not actually a thing. Corporate law gives officers great discretion in how to run the business.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- enraged_camel 11y ago>>As long as litigation is of a positive net present value (i.e. expected return is positive) then they have a duty to their shareholders to undertake it. This is a myth that has been debunked many, many times.
- victorhooi 11y agoI'm not disputing whether this is true or not - but do you have any sources, or articles on this?
- PhasmaFelis 11y agoSo, they're not illegitimately strongarming people because they want to, only because someone is paying them to do it? Is that supposed to make it better? I really hate how people hurry to come up with excuses for corporations and their representatives acting like jerks. They can take responsibility for their actions just like the rest of us.