3 ms·
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 (
by 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 agoThere 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 agolast 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.