5 ms·

Is the country effective in turning companies around?

• triceratops 7y ago
  The "country" doesn't have to do anything special to turn the company around - the company's management ought to be capable of that once the economy recovers. As long as the government doesn't pack the board with cronies, nothing should change. Assuming that's the case, it should make no difference who the majority shareholder is: the government, a large institutional investor, or the general public. There's no reason failing companies should receive "bailouts" - defined as government-granted low-interest loans, often without suitable collateral. If the government puts in money, it should receive shares.
  • ericmay 7y ago
    Sorry I'm not sure your comment is following what I responded to.
    • triceratops 7y ago
      Sorry, I thought you were asking if a national takeover of a company could lead to a turnaround. Were you not?
      • ericmay 7y ago
        Did you see the parent comment that I responded to? I'm not sure what you're trying to suggest here.
  • jariel 7y ago
    Almost all of the French industry is led by 'cronies'. Macron is the 'top crony' - he was plucked from the layer of 'new young cronies' to save France from Le Pen. In Europe, since the revolutions, the primary marker of crony isn't so much birth, it's education, i.e. Oxbridge/Grande Ecole etc., but once they're through that 'kind of egalitarian' gamut of education, it's mostly 'crony' from there on in. This has a kind of nationalist/communitarian aspect which can be helpful in times such as this (cronie CEO is buddies with cronie Minister of Finance), but it's generally not good for competition and global competitiveness.