3 ms·

> Companies exist to make money Fiduciary duty isn't the same as company mission or purpose. If Google did not provide some sort of product or service it woul

> Companies exist to make money Fiduciary duty isn't the same as company mission or purpose. If Google did not provide some sort of product or service it would not need to exist as a company. Even if Google were a pure research lab without obvious consumer or business products or services it would still be doing non-financial work that someone thought provided some kind of benefit. Investors are not Google's only stakeholders. Without customers or employees (for example) Google would cease to exist. Google may also discover that the general public is another stakeholder. Google's mission statement[1] isn't actually "to make as much money as possible" or even "to provide maximum value to shareholders" but rather "to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful." [1] https://about.google/intl/ALL_us/ https://about.google/intl/ALL_us/

saurik 4y ago
Yes yes, though you forgot the "(except on Windows phone)" part ;P... but the issue is that if the company ever has to make a serious decision between better organizing the world's information and making more money for shareholders and it doesn't optimize for the money, then that's where the fiduciary duty part comes in and why it seems entirely fair to say that that's the company's actual purpose, not whatever tag line makes them feel better about it (and yes: this is why public companies are essentially all inherently evil).
- jcheng 4y ago
  Public Benefit Corporations are one solution to this dilemma and they can be publicly traded. https://www.natlawreview.com/article/public-benefit-corporations-are-going-public?amp https://www.natlawreview.com/article/public-benefit-corporat...
- p_l 4y ago
  There's no fiduciary duty to make money for shareholders - that's Friedman's Big Lie that's been memed into virtual law. The fiduciary duty of company board to shareholders is to not steal or flagrantly mismanage the company (for example by actions benefit board members but negatively impact company operations). Making a profit and sharing it with shareholders is not a requirement nor duty.

saurik 4y ago

Yes yes, though you forgot the "(except on Windows phone)" part ;P... but the issue is that if the company ever has to make a serious decision between better organizing the world's information and making more money for shareholders and it doesn't optimize for the money, then that's where the fiduciary duty part comes in and why it seems entirely fair to say that that's the company's actual purpose, not whatever tag line makes them feel better about it (and yes: this is why public companies are essentially all inherently evil).

jcheng 4y ago
Public Benefit Corporations are one solution to this dilemma and they can be publicly traded. https://www.natlawreview.com/article/public-benefit-corporations-are-going-public?amp https://www.natlawreview.com/article/public-benefit-corporat...
p_l 4y ago
There's no fiduciary duty to make money for shareholders - that's Friedman's Big Lie that's been memed into virtual law. The fiduciary duty of company board to shareholders is to not steal or flagrantly mismanage the company (for example by actions benefit board members but negatively impact company operations). Making a profit and sharing it with shareholders is not a requirement nor duty.