5 ms·

> their responsibilities lie with their shareholders This is the "shareholder value" theory, modern economists successfully brainwashed the population with. It

> their responsibilities lie with their shareholders This is the "shareholder value" theory, modern economists successfully brainwashed the population with. It became popular during the 1980s, "greed is good" times. It's just an ideology disguised as a science. The purpose and structure of modern corporation hasn't changed in the last hundred years or so. In 1950s and 1960s the public good, among others, role of corporations was wildly accepted. What changed is the ideologues who became more vicious and took complete control of the narrative.

tmd83 8y ago
I was thinking similar things. I'm plenty sure they don't have any legal responsibility to mislead and confuse people which is essentially what they are doing. They might have a legal responsibility to say we are at fault if their internal investigation is still ongoing. But almost certainly knowing they are fault and trying to placate people and distribute blame is all about greed, lack of moral and setting up a false narrative of 'duty to shareholder'.
everdev 8y ago
If the CEO of a public company owns 10% of that company's shares and 90% of their new worth comes from the value of that stock, I can imagine them caring a great deal about increasing the value of the stock. This is what people are referring to when they say "shareholder value" -- diving up the value of the stock.
TrolTure 8y ago
Somewhat hilariously it's also often claimed that CEO's are not allowed to lie due to then being liable for misinforming shareholders.
- Judgmentality 8y ago
  Are you saying it's okay to commit fraud?
  - bitreality 8y ago
    They avoid making actionable statements. In this case, the CEO did not explicitly assign blame, so it would be difficult to call them a liar. Omitting is different from lying. Using vague terminology isn't lying. So you get stuck with all this corporate talk, where they act as if they're apologizing, but won't even really say what they are specifically apologizing for.
- FabHK 8y ago
  Matt Levine's excellent Bloomberg newsletter "Money Stuff" frequently comments on this - search for the phrase "Everything is securities fraud": many reprehensible things a company does are possibly not technically illegal per se (or it's hard to prove that they are), but they do constitute securities fraud, and that's easier to prove and prosecute. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=money+stuff+matt+levine+%22everything+is+securities+fraud%22+site%3Abloomberg.com https://duckduckgo.com/?q=money+stuff+matt+levine+%22everyth...
mtgx 8y ago
Sen. Elizabeth Warren's Accountable Capitalism Act seems like a great step in the right direction to make this more clear. https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren-introduces-accountable-capitalism-act https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren...
- icebraining 8y ago
  "Sorry, a potential security risk was detected in your submitted request. The Webmaster has been alerted." Holy crap, should I be on the lookout for black helicopters? For someone having the same problem: https://web.archive.org/web/20190402011933/https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren-introduces-accountable-capitalism-act https://web.archive.org/web/20190402011933/https://www.warre...
woofcat 8y ago
Sure, however BA is part of the S&P500. I would wager almost every American who has retirement savings owns a chunk of BA. As well as most people in the Western world. As much as we would love to having Boeing stock plummet, it will impact most people even if they're not aware that they own it.
- belorn 8y ago
  Does not the majority have index fonds, which mean that a drop for BA is rather minor overall and stock money released from people selling BA stocks will then be invested in other companies on the market?
  - woofcat 8y ago
    You are correct they have index funds, and the people selling off BA stock _may_ be investing in one of the other 499 S&P listed companies, or they may not be.

tmd83 8y ago

I was thinking similar things. I'm plenty sure they don't have any legal responsibility to mislead and confuse people which is essentially what they are doing. They might have a legal responsibility to say we are at fault if their internal investigation is still ongoing. But almost certainly knowing they are fault and trying to placate people and distribute blame is all about greed, lack of moral and setting up a false narrative of 'duty to shareholder'.

everdev 8y ago

If the CEO of a public company owns 10% of that company's shares and 90% of their new worth comes from the value of that stock, I can imagine them caring a great deal about increasing the value of the stock. This is what people are referring to when they say "shareholder value" -- diving up the value of the stock.

TrolTure 8y ago

Somewhat hilariously it's also often claimed that CEO's are not allowed to lie due to then being liable for misinforming shareholders.

Judgmentality 8y ago
Are you saying it's okay to commit fraud?
- bitreality 8y ago
  They avoid making actionable statements. In this case, the CEO did not explicitly assign blame, so it would be difficult to call them a liar. Omitting is different from lying. Using vague terminology isn't lying. So you get stuck with all this corporate talk, where they act as if they're apologizing, but won't even really say what they are specifically apologizing for.
FabHK 8y ago
Matt Levine's excellent Bloomberg newsletter "Money Stuff" frequently comments on this - search for the phrase "Everything is securities fraud": many reprehensible things a company does are possibly not technically illegal per se (or it's hard to prove that they are), but they do constitute securities fraud, and that's easier to prove and prosecute. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=money+stuff+matt+levine+%22everything+is+securities+fraud%22+site%3Abloomberg.com https://duckduckgo.com/?q=money+stuff+matt+levine+%22everyth...

mtgx 8y ago

Sen. Elizabeth Warren's Accountable Capitalism Act seems like a great step in the right direction to make this more clear. https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren-introduces-accountable-capitalism-act https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren...

icebraining 8y ago
"Sorry, a potential security risk was detected in your submitted request. The Webmaster has been alerted." Holy crap, should I be on the lookout for black helicopters? For someone having the same problem: https://web.archive.org/web/20190402011933/https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren-introduces-accountable-capitalism-act https://web.archive.org/web/20190402011933/https://www.warre...

woofcat 8y ago

Sure, however BA is part of the S&P500. I would wager almost every American who has retirement savings owns a chunk of BA. As well as most people in the Western world. As much as we would love to having Boeing stock plummet, it will impact most people even if they're not aware that they own it.

belorn 8y ago
Does not the majority have index fonds, which mean that a drop for BA is rather minor overall and stock money released from people selling BA stocks will then be invested in other companies on the market?
- woofcat 8y ago
  You are correct they have index funds, and the people selling off BA stock _may_ be investing in one of the other 499 S&P listed companies, or they may not be.