4 ms·

Who is the "shareholder"? The shareholders are the collective owners of the company. That is, the people/organizations who own a share of the company. Full s

by rmah 5y ago

Who is the "shareholder"? The shareholders are the collective owners of the company. That is, the people/organizations who own a share of the company. Full stop. No one else is a shareholder. Neither the working person toiling away, nor the army of intermediaries are shareholders (unless they happen to also own stock). And value in the phrase "shareholder value" is economic value. I.e. money or that which can be measured using money. It's not personal fulfillment, social well-being, global health or anything else like that. At larger firms, shareholders typically contribute nothing to the management and operation of the firm. But concepts of ownership in the modern world do not hinge on labor contribution. Note, I'm not advocating what I wrote above, I'm just describing the state of the world as it is.

streamofdigits 5y ago
i think I was not clear (enough). not referring to random pay-day loan worker but people who own stocks through their pension or insurance schemes this group (which is quite material in the scheme of things) is only remotely linked to their shareholding role. with important repercusions on both i) how much strict economic value they derive and ii) whether that value is at all compatible with their other sets of values
- rmah 5y ago
  There is no role for shareholders other than the simple fact that they (as a group) own the company. That's all it means. It means nothing else. There is zero obligation or expectation that they do anything but simply own.
  - streamofdigits 5y ago
    last time I checked the lack of obligation is not the same as a lack of option. owning equity in a company is THE option and there IS an expectation that any shareholder that is not disenfranchised by helpful intermediaries will be exercising it. everything the company does is under the control of shareholders. they have they option to fire the management and rewrite practically the entire rulebook of what the company does. now it should be pretty clear that a lot of shareholders (across the size spectrum) would not necessarily disagree with management choices that optimize short term financial returns but to assume that every shareholder has this moral stance is simply a falsehood and that is increasingly becoming clear.

by rmah 5y ago

streamofdigits 5y ago

i think I was not clear (enough). not referring to random pay-day loan worker but people who own stocks through their pension or insurance schemes this group (which is quite material in the scheme of things) is only remotely linked to their shareholding role. with important repercusions on both i) how much strict economic value they derive and ii) whether that value is at all compatible with their other sets of values

rmah 5y ago
There is no role for shareholders other than the simple fact that they (as a group) own the company. That's all it means. It means nothing else. There is zero obligation or expectation that they do anything but simply own.
- streamofdigits 5y ago
  last time I checked the lack of obligation is not the same as a lack of option. owning equity in a company is THE option and there IS an expectation that any shareholder that is not disenfranchised by helpful intermediaries will be exercising it. everything the company does is under the control of shareholders. they have they option to fire the management and rewrite practically the entire rulebook of what the company does. now it should be pretty clear that a lot of shareholders (across the size spectrum) would not necessarily disagree with management choices that optimize short term financial returns but to assume that every shareholder has this moral stance is simply a falsehood and that is increasingly becoming clear.