3 ms·

Could anyone here explain how this fit in with Google's mission?

enomar 18y ago
While their state mission might be "Organize the world's information and make it universally accessible", I'm pretty sure public companies are obligated to do what's best for their shareholders. In this case, I think they were trying to make money ;)
- tome 18y ago
  > public companies are obligated to do what's best for their shareholders I hear this a lot. Do you have a reference for that, particularly one which explains which definition of "best" is used?
  - fallentimes 18y ago
    Especially since what's "best" in the short term is different than what's "best" in the long term.
    - tome 18y ago
      Quite, and my main problem with it is that although "best" may be well defined, the path to "best" may be very uncertain.
  - enomar 18y ago
    That's a good question. I'm guilty here of throwing around "common knowledge" without knowing the actual facts. Thanks for calling me on it :) I have only heard that officers and directors of public companies have a fiduciary obligation to their shareholders. Whether that obligation is legal or philosophical, I'm not sure. Doing a quick search here, I found little information pertaining to any legal requirements, but there are several cases of shareholders suing a company for not meeting their fiduciary duties. Based on that, it seem like there is some legal basis for this, but IANAL.
- AndrewWarner 18y ago
  Don't companies that stick to their mission make more money than companies that try anything to make a buck?
- known 18y ago
  Isn't it time to regulate market capitalization (not more than 2 times quarterly revenue) of listed companies?
ntoshev 18y ago
Newspapers print ads that contain information, if Google could optimize the ad placement relative to content that would be a better organization. The biggest problems with this seems to be that it is not measurable whether you really improved placement or not.

While their state mission might be "Organize the world's information and make it universally accessible", I'm pretty sure public companies are obligated to do what's best for their shareholders. In this case, I think they were trying to make money ;)

tome 18y ago
> public companies are obligated to do what's best for their shareholders I hear this a lot. Do you have a reference for that, particularly one which explains which definition of "best" is used?
- fallentimes 18y ago
  Especially since what's "best" in the short term is different than what's "best" in the long term.
  - tome 18y ago
    Quite, and my main problem with it is that although "best" may be well defined, the path to "best" may be very uncertain.
- enomar 18y ago
  That's a good question. I'm guilty here of throwing around "common knowledge" without knowing the actual facts. Thanks for calling me on it :) I have only heard that officers and directors of public companies have a fiduciary obligation to their shareholders. Whether that obligation is legal or philosophical, I'm not sure. Doing a quick search here, I found little information pertaining to any legal requirements, but there are several cases of shareholders suing a company for not meeting their fiduciary duties. Based on that, it seem like there is some legal basis for this, but IANAL.
AndrewWarner 18y ago
Don't companies that stick to their mission make more money than companies that try anything to make a buck?
known 18y ago
Isn't it time to regulate market capitalization (not more than 2 times quarterly revenue) of listed companies?

ntoshev 18y ago

Newspapers print ads that contain information, if Google could optimize the ad placement relative to content that would be a better organization. The biggest problems with this seems to be that it is not measurable whether you really improved placement or not.