3 ms·

As a person, maybe if I squint very very very hard. Legally, he has a duty to maximize value for his board and investors. And there hasn't been a business mode

As a person, maybe if I squint very very very hard. Legally, he has a duty to maximize value for his board and investors. And there hasn't been a business model that provides a free consumer web product without monetizing user data.

smrq 8y ago
Why does this shareholder value meme keep getting perpetuated?
- floatrock 8y ago
  Because that's who a CEO reports to and that's how a CEO gets fired. Some CEO's like Elon and Jobs can spin a great story and hold on by sheer force of personality, but pension funds aren't buying FB in bulk to get more green cars on the road.
  - vonmoltke 8y ago
    > Because that's who a CEO reports to and that's how a CEO gets fired. That has nothing to do with the legal requirements of the company or the CEO. That would be the same as saying I am "legally required" to go to work tomorrow, because I could get fired for not showing up.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
jacquesm 8y ago
> Legally, he has a duty to maximize value for his board members and investors. Please stop repeating that nonsense.
reaperducer 8y ago
Legally, he has a duty to maximize value for his board and investors You should probably stop using the word "legally" in this context. There have been thousands of companies over the decades that put other things before shareholder value, and somehow managed to not run afoul of the law. Also, it might help if you provided a citation to this law to bolster your argument. And there hasn't been a business model that provides a free consumer web product without monetizing user data. Also false.
- floatrock 8y ago
  I'd love to read a blog post talking about how to make free consumer web apps without monetizing user data. I really would. That's the crux of the issue here -- is there an alternative to the ad-tech playbook? There's all the Redhat / enterprise open-source examples, but I'm specifically talking about consumer web products. Redhat's product is enterprise infrastructure. There's free as in a trial or limited functionality to get you to buy the premium offering, but then the business model isn't really based off a free product... the free product is a promotion, not a business model. You can have one group of premium users subsidize all the free users. In social, the main examples would be LinkedIn or Angelist, but again, access to the user data is the product these companies eventually sell. There's Wikipedia, but that's a non-profit. Nothing wrong with that, people make a living that way and we need more like it, but I'm talking about companies where profits can serve as a strong motivator. This also excludes government services. Maybe Google Maps qualified as free in the beginning, but any free service that Google makes is pretty much some clever way to acquire more user data to support other parts of the enterprise. HN itself falls under this category: HN is an ingestion pipeline for YC (the YC app asks for your HN handle, hello future YC app reviewer!). I know it's a trite and a tired saying, but it really is true: if you're not paying for it, you are the product. That's not bad per-se... another way of looking at it is in the same way the sharing economy unlocked underutilized physical assets, these services have unlocked a new source of wealth not measured by our wallets: our attention. Lets describe it as we pay for these services with our attention-dollars. My point is anything that's a "free consumer service" business model is really some kind of machine that converts attention-dollars into cash-dollars. I would love to see a discussion of non-cash-dollar, non-attention-dollar business models. If you can think of a way of giving away Something that People Want (TM) for free without the corrupting influence of optimizing for their attention, well, you've found the next genuinely interesting unicorn.
  - vonmoltke 8y ago
    Absolutely none of what you wrote has anything to do with legal duties.
    - 8y ago
odorousrex 8y ago
>Legally Citation needed!!! It is not illegal to have other goals than maximizing shareholder value. For example, Costco. Publicly traded company but the employees are paid well, customers are well taken care of, and the CEO is rewarded for this. In the short-term, Costco could generate an enormous amount of value by automated, reducing wages, and finding cheaper supplies and lowering quality, selling their customer's membership information, etc. But they don't. And there is nothing illegal about it.

smrq 8y ago

Why does this shareholder value meme keep getting perpetuated?

floatrock 8y ago
Because that's who a CEO reports to and that's how a CEO gets fired. Some CEO's like Elon and Jobs can spin a great story and hold on by sheer force of personality, but pension funds aren't buying FB in bulk to get more green cars on the road.
- vonmoltke 8y ago
  > Because that's who a CEO reports to and that's how a CEO gets fired. That has nothing to do with the legal requirements of the company or the CEO. That would be the same as saying I am "legally required" to go to work tomorrow, because I could get fired for not showing up.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

jacquesm 8y ago

> Legally, he has a duty to maximize value for his board members and investors. Please stop repeating that nonsense.

reaperducer 8y ago

Legally, he has a duty to maximize value for his board and investors You should probably stop using the word "legally" in this context. There have been thousands of companies over the decades that put other things before shareholder value, and somehow managed to not run afoul of the law. Also, it might help if you provided a citation to this law to bolster your argument. And there hasn't been a business model that provides a free consumer web product without monetizing user data. Also false.

floatrock 8y ago
I'd love to read a blog post talking about how to make free consumer web apps without monetizing user data. I really would. That's the crux of the issue here -- is there an alternative to the ad-tech playbook? There's all the Redhat / enterprise open-source examples, but I'm specifically talking about consumer web products. Redhat's product is enterprise infrastructure. There's free as in a trial or limited functionality to get you to buy the premium offering, but then the business model isn't really based off a free product... the free product is a promotion, not a business model. You can have one group of premium users subsidize all the free users. In social, the main examples would be LinkedIn or Angelist, but again, access to the user data is the product these companies eventually sell. There's Wikipedia, but that's a non-profit. Nothing wrong with that, people make a living that way and we need more like it, but I'm talking about companies where profits can serve as a strong motivator. This also excludes government services. Maybe Google Maps qualified as free in the beginning, but any free service that Google makes is pretty much some clever way to acquire more user data to support other parts of the enterprise. HN itself falls under this category: HN is an ingestion pipeline for YC (the YC app asks for your HN handle, hello future YC app reviewer!). I know it's a trite and a tired saying, but it really is true: if you're not paying for it, you are the product. That's not bad per-se... another way of looking at it is in the same way the sharing economy unlocked underutilized physical assets, these services have unlocked a new source of wealth not measured by our wallets: our attention. Lets describe it as we pay for these services with our attention-dollars. My point is anything that's a "free consumer service" business model is really some kind of machine that converts attention-dollars into cash-dollars. I would love to see a discussion of non-cash-dollar, non-attention-dollar business models. If you can think of a way of giving away Something that People Want (TM) for free without the corrupting influence of optimizing for their attention, well, you've found the next genuinely interesting unicorn.
- vonmoltke 8y ago
  Absolutely none of what you wrote has anything to do with legal duties.
  - 8y ago

odorousrex 8y ago

>Legally Citation needed!!! It is not illegal to have other goals than maximizing shareholder value. For example, Costco. Publicly traded company but the employees are paid well, customers are well taken care of, and the CEO is rewarded for this. In the short-term, Costco could generate an enormous amount of value by automated, reducing wages, and finding cheaper supplies and lowering quality, selling their customer's membership information, etc. But they don't. And there is nothing illegal about it.