3 ms·
No. There was never a legal duty to maximize shareholder returns. There's a legal duty to not cheat shareholders by idiotic spending, pocketing the investment
by p_l 4y ago
No. There was never a legal duty to maximize shareholder returns.
There's a legal duty to not cheat shareholders by idiotic spending, pocketing the investment money, and the like. But there was never a duty to optimize returns to shareholders.
- qeternity 4y agoNo. I never said maximize shareholder returns. You hallucinated that. I said that corporations exist for their shareholders. This is a legal fiduciary duty.
- 1propionyl 4y ago> corporations exist for their shareholders The history of incorporation suggests the contrary. This attitude is backed up mainly only by 1980s-onwards neo-proprietarian ideology/faith/apologia. > This is a legal fiduciary duty. Much like use of fiduciary in the usual sense: not screwing over your shareholders is, yes. Not choosing the plan to maximize the right outcomes ("quality attributes" other than profit exist) after the right length (short or long?) time not being the best one? No.
- p_l 4y agoCorporations exist to fulfill the purposes stated in their incorporation documents. Shareholders usually get some vote through the board, but they are secondary to the actual incorporation documents.