"The idea can be traced in large part to the oversize effects of a single outdated and widely misunderstood ruling by the Michigan Supreme Court's 1919 decision in Dodge v. Ford Motor Co. [...]"https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/shareholder-value.asp …
-
-
-
This is a case started b/c Ford figured that the Dodge brothers (2nd largest shareholder in his company) were using their dividends to start a rival car company. So they compel Ford to keep paying dividends rather than lowering prices and raising wages.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Fiduciary duty to shareholders definitely is a thing, just very hard to establish a compelling enough case of its breach to bring a successful suit so it practically never happens iirc.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The Corp. Raiding blockade laws and shaped public opinion are head tilting twins to this
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Nope. Just an idea, over interpreted, out of the univ of Chicago. The fiduciary responsibility is not a legal requirement, and even conceptually, it isn’t focused on the short term. Stock buy-backs are an indication of incompetent and rent seeking management.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.