4 ms·
Somewhat less cynical view, but maybe corporations were allowed to be more long term focused in the past?
by bumby 2y ago
Somewhat less cynical view, but maybe corporations were allowed to be more long term focused in the past?
- ElevenLathe 2y agoOr maybe they had to be, with interest and tax rates what they were?
- bumby 2y agoCould you elaborate or be more specific? Given how long BL existed, I’m not sure I can pin down what rates you’re talking about
- gregw2 2y agoOne of the commenters on the original article said "Bell Labs was funded through a 1% tax on Bell's overall revenue, as well as a claim on a portion of Western Electric's revenue, so yes, AT&T was able to recoup Bell Labs' expenses." This would protect it from (at least certain types of) C-suite predation presumably.
- sneed_chucker 2y agoAT&T wasn't publicly traded until 1984, so there's a clue for you right there
- dogsgobork 2y agoBy 1984 AT&T had been listed on the NYSE for over 80 years.
- nik_0_0 2y ago“The American Telephone and Telegraph Company (AT&T) was listed on the NYSE on Sept. 4, 1901. Only 11 other companies have been listed longer than AT&T.“ Yeah, impressively wrong gp! 1984 was when they were broken up by Justice Department.
- hibikir 2y agoYou don't need to mandate a short term view when the executive's massive pay packages depend on stock valuations: They will chase the money all by themselves, not trying to build a company that might make major discoveries eventually