Hacker News Reader

Comment by ksk | Hacker News Reader

Why is that so bad? Shareholders are the owners of the company.

Shareholders are known for optimizing for short-term liquidity or value gain, because even if some shareholders have a long-term view, shorter-term holders can buy in and force their views.

However, in many cases this is in direct conflict with much larger value growth that requires a longer investment term. Or in conflict with valuing greater long-term stability over a quick short-term gain.

Yeah, that's how the game works. Its like democracy - people can and do vote for idiots.

When you accept outside funding in exchange for shares, control gets shared. Honestly, do we really need to debate this?

You are the one who asked why it was bad. Why ask a question if you don't want to know or debate it? Was it purely rhetorical?

No, what I'm saying is not up for debate is the fact that control gets shared when you take someone else's money. Its a known framework in which everyone operates.

Your "shareholders are known for" is simply a BS talking point. Every person who has a 401K is probably a shareholder somewhere. All those hundreds of millions of people value long term stability too. Nintendo is not a penny stock.

It's a different thing to say "I value long term thinking" and acting that way, and rewarding long term thinking. It may be that people are simply too stupid to see that the ship is being hacked up for fuel, and thus they put their faith in the captain doing so.

It’s a common misunderstanding that the only purpose of a company is to make shareholders happy.

It's not a misunderstanding its how companies work. If you make shareholders unhappy you simply risk them leaving. Thats why on average companies do things that make them happy. Oh, also the shareholders pick the board and the board does things for the company. You can see the relationship now?

I know how companies are governed, and it is of course an empirical fact that most large listed American companies are run to maximise stockholder value. But that does not mean that it is the purpose of all, or even most companies. People run companies with a variety of reasons, including things like having fun or making the world a better place. More importantly, companies have moral obligations not only to stock holders, but to the employees, the environment, and the communities they operate in.

You're right - that is a misunderstanding. I think you accidentally replied to the wrong comment seeing as I didn't say or imply that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com