4 ms·
> He's legally obligated to maximize shareholder value. Is this actually true? Or just a "institutional wisdom"?
by r00fus 7y ago
> He's legally obligated to maximize shareholder value.
Is this actually true? Or just a "institutional wisdom"?
- jmchuster 7y agoprobably more that he's obligated to do so to keep his job
- reaperducer 7y agoTim Cook has enough money that he doesn't need to work anymore. It's not like he's a wage ape pounding code in a cubicle all day.
- Hamuko 7y agoIt's false. It's just that it's close to what's actually true, so it's pretty easy to pass it as a fact. Basically, what a company is required to do is serve the BEST INTERESTS of its shareholders. This might not necessarily be the same as maximising shareholder value. https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-corporations-obligations-to-shareholders/corporations-dont-have-to-maximize-profits https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-co...
- laughinghan 7y agoThanks for the clarification, I hadn't seen that before. Although I don't think the distinction changes the point I made.
- musicale 7y ago"When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind, I don't consider the bloody ROI... If you want me to do things only for ROI reasons, you should get out of this stock." - Tim Cook