Hasn’t been for decades but admitting it is the first step to recovery.

Hasn’t been for decades but admitting it is the first step to recovery. It was Delaware, 1930 that changed the definition of a corporation by removing shareholder control and switching it to director control.

From that point on, shareholders had lost their power in US corporations.

In all other nations, shareholders have significant control of a corporation, but in different ways..

This shift KEEPS the power with the CEOs and removes it further away from shareholders. BUT as director control was not going away, at least they are now:

a) being honest: it was never about maximizing shareholder value (since Delaware, 1930): that was a marketing / PR blurb and can be proven through historical corporate decisions.

b) using their marketing / PR blurb in a NOVEL way that reflects the values that will keep them out of lawsuits, improve customer relations and give an appearance of corporate moral integrity (to substitute for the Ayn Randian amoral stance held as US Corporate Bible for so many decades) which will appeal to:

c) branding, which affects all advertising-watching and shopping citizens, from children to seniors, stock investors and non-stock investors.

It is a VERY intelligent move and as a consolation prize for having to deal with the continuation of a corporate stranglehold on US commerce and daily life, AT LEAST it will go down more smoothly.

In short, it’s probably the best they CAN do. Here’s hoping we hold them to it.

—–

 

That’s the weird thing about US corporations:

The shareholders should be able to sue directors AS the Corporation because the Corporation _is_ the shareholders: or is every place BUT the USA.

In the USA though, “the Courts defer to the Board of Directors”.

=====

You can’t really sue a corporation for not maximizing profits.

They can be sued for many other reasons, and although ” corporate officers and directors have a duty to manage the corporation for the purpose of maximizing profits for the benefit of shareholders” is the rule,….

…There’s no way to prove that they’re not.

So it’s been just buzzwords for 100 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.

======

This corporate rule is SO wickedly clever too.

=====

Oh gosh it’s worse than I thought.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_suit (suing the company on behalf of the company as shareholders) is EXTREMELY rare.

=====

 

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


4 + one =

Leave a Reply