3 ms·
I don't completely understand that argument. If a board member owns let's say 0.1 % of total shares, but that represents 90 % of his private fortune, he will be
by mongol 5y ago
I don't completely understand that argument. If a board member owns let's say 0.1 % of total shares, but that represents 90 % of his private fortune, he will be very incentivized to increase the value of the company. On the other hand, if it represents 1 % of his total fortune, I can see the point.
- cryptonector 5y agoIf you own 1 share of Twitter and you're on the board, and you own no other shares, will that 1 share be much incentive, do you think? And what are the chances that a large publicly held company has board members who own just that company's stock??
- mongol 5y agoThat misrepresents my point. Most people strive to increase their fortune no matter whether it represents a large share of a company's total market value or not. If they have a large stake in one company compared to other investments, then that company represents a larger leverage for them to increase their fortune.
- nullc 5y agoThere are many avenues for increasing your personal fortune through influence over twitter other than increasing the value of your shares-- particularly when you own relatively few twitter shares.