4 ms·
Honest question: why not? Those 97% should have been fully aware of this arrangement when they bought their stock.
by svantana 4y ago
Honest question: why not? Those 97% should have been fully aware of this arrangement when they bought their stock.
- hn_throwaway_99 4y agoThe company still has a fiduciary duty to all shareholders, not just majority owners. A smaller shareholder could still argue in court that management is breaching those responsibilities. That said (and IANAL), at least the couple suits I'm familiar with in this area have to do with minority shareholders arguing some decision was made to benefit majority owners at the expense of minority shareholders. It's much, much more difficult to just argue "bad decision making" if all shareholders are affected equally.