3 ms·
You are glossing over the fact that the current board of directors are not the same people who got the company into trouble in 2008. They are the ones who turn
by sswaner 14y ago
You are glossing over the fact that the current board of directors are not the same people who got the company into trouble in 2008. They are the ones who turned the company around. They also have the same mandate as the board of any other publicly traded company: maximize value for the shareholders.
- Mvandenbergh 14y ago>You are glossing over the fact that the current board of directors are not the same people who got the company into trouble in 2008. That doesn't bear on whether they could (jokingly obv.) claim to be an unsophisticated victim of predatory lending, only the board at the time matters for that. The board can run the company the way they want, barring gross misconduct or fraud, the shareholders had their say at the AGM.
- dhugiaskmak 14y agoThey also have the same mandate as the board of any other publicly traded company: maximize value for the shareholders. This is wrong. http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/2012/06/26/the-shareholder-value-myth/ http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/2012/06/26/the-sharehol...
- sswaner 14y agoJust because some professor says it is harmful doesn't mean boards don't have that as a priority. And, the AIG CEO has publicly said his goal is to make his company as profitable as possible, and that may mean going to court.