4 ms·
> "Is anyone really going to miss that $4 billion?" Yes, the people who own the company will, i.e. shareholders. The majority are not some cartoonish greedy f
by ThrowawayR2 4y ago
> "Is anyone really going to miss that $4 billion?"
Yes, the people who own the company will, i.e. shareholders. The majority are not some cartoonish greedy fatcats either; they're ordinary people like you and I who have retirement investments in stocks and mutual funds.
Moreover, if you think employees at FAANGs and big tech companies aren't on-board with this laser focus on share price, remember that a big, big chunk of their compensation is in equity, whether options, stock grants, employee stock purchase programs, etc. During the boom times, plenty of people in the software industry kept a live stock ticker feed on their desktops to keep track of how filthy rich they were getting and it was a frequent topic of casual conversation.
- jeffwask 4y ago> The majority are not some cartoonish greedy fatcats either; 53% of all stocks are held by the 1% so yes Virginia the MAJORITY are some cartoonish greedy fatcats
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- ThrowawayR2 4y agoFAANG and other big tech employees can earn in the top 1-5% annual income and can reach the top 1% net worth, which suggests that likely they're more aligned with the cartoonish greedy fatcats than any other worldview so I can't imagine why you think that would help your argument. Beyond that, while I have met a few individuals that I'd describe as villainous, I'd say the majority whom I suspected of that level of wealth were fairly normal and decent people.
- zeroonetwothree 4y agoI don't care how many stocks the 1% own. I do care that my own investments increase in value. So I want companies to make decisions that benefit shareholders (including me). Just because some rich guy makes $10 million while I make $10,000 doesn't mean I'd rather not make the $10,000.
- sudosysgen 4y agoIf you buy and hold, then a company taking a short term loss to avoid long term consequences is in your interest. If you are a speculative investor, then circumstances are different.
- sangnoir 4y ago> Moreover, if you think employees at FAANGs and big tech companies aren't on-board with this laser focus on share price, remember that a big, big chunk of their compensation is in equity... The magnifies the short-termism problem, as employees - like In 'n Out investors - prefer winning battles in the short term, even at the cost of losing the war since they won't stick around the losing side beyond their vesting period.
- Aeolun 4y agoI dunno, I have my retirement investments in stocks and mutual funds. Whether Apple earns 20B in profits or 24B in profits doesn’t make a whit of difference to me. If they improve their stock price by only 1% this year so they’re in a position to improve it by 6% next year, then that’s a good thing. Conversely, companies that immediately fire people because their stock gain was less than the 3% they expected, are too flaky to invest in.
- zeroonetwothree 4y agoSure it doesn't matter too much if apple makes 4B more. But in aggregate if the whole market starts caring about profit significantly less it's going to slow down growth of your investments. And so 30 years from now when you earned only 2% returns you might think, "hmm I wish those companies had tried to be more efficient".
- Aeolun 4y agoWell, maybe not since I live in a socialist paradise. If the whole investment thing falls through I'll just have less money, not nothing. I'd love it if the market stopped caring about profits to much and instead focused on quality. We might actually get to a post scarcity society that way.