Like Tree144Likes

NBA, Activision, Disney - Corporate America and the HK crisis

Reply
Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ... 7 12 13 14 15
  1. #141

    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    432
    Quote Originally Posted by Mefisto
    I keep seeing this old excuse/myth still repeated. Can you point out any jurisdictions where this duty exists?
    As I did take pains to point out, my viewpoint is from right of centre in terms of economics. As a shareholder, I don’t believe it’s a corporate entity’s right to do charity or achieve social goals at my expense (or for my benefit at the expense of that of others). On the other hand, the company should observe all applicable laws and would be well-advised to take note of the social considerations in the jurisdictions which they operate. I’m not opposed to social justice per se, but the resolution of the principal-agent problem requires that the corporate employees be primarily accountable to their shareholders. That does not rule out in practice considering the social costs and impact to long-term profits that certain choices or activities might have, but does provide clarity in terms of responsibility.

    For the fiduciary duty to shareholders (and implied responsibility to maximise profit), the standard reference is Dodge v. Ford [1919] in the United States.

    My apologies if this viewpoint is offensive to you.

  2. #142

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,293

    No, I totally get some people's single-minded objective to maximize profits (at any cost to others). Whether I personally find that objectionable obviously depends on the case, but holding such a viewpoint isn't "offensive" per se.

    I just haven't seen any factual evidence pointing out that maximizing profit is an actual legal requirement.


    edit: here's one amusing fiduciary requirement from a "presidential adviser" no less.

    https://twitter.com/RightWingWatch/s...76197504790528

    Last edited by Mefisto; 19-10-2019 at 04:04 PM.

  3. #143

    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    432
    Quote Originally Posted by Mefisto
    No, I totally get some people's single-minded objective to maximize profits (at any cost to others). Whether I personally find that objectionable obviously depends on the case, but holding such a viewpoint isn't "offensive" per se.

    I just haven't seen any factual evidence pointing out that maximizing profit is an actual legal requirement.


    edit: here's one amusing fiduciary requirement from a "presidential adviser" no less.

    https://twitter.com/RightWingWatch/s...76197504790528
    That’s reasonable. It seems in terms of maximising profit the duty is more implied than explicit, but the fiduciary duty to shareholders at least is in Dodge v. Ford.

    Bleah. The tweet you quoted is precisely why I think at a conceptual level, corporates and the state should stay out of promoting particular values or outcomes as a starting point. Having said that, I recognise the market can be imperfect, so there may be a role for incorporating externalities and certain adjustments and protections for the benefit of society at a lower cost than that by private institutions.

    Anyway, this is probably starting to go off-topic so hopefully we can round it off by concluding the HK protests are not a matter of right or left, but right and wrong. Freedom of speech and the ability to live in dignity and freedom from fear of state violence/police brutality should be something everyone can subscribe to.
    Mefisto likes this.

  4. #144

  5. #145

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Old London Town
    Posts
    171
    Quote Originally Posted by UK/HKboy
    Cathay and TVB would have been destroyed if they hadn't submitted. Cathay is one of the largest employers in HK so would have had huge consequences if they weren't allowed to operate as normal. And there probably would have been further restrictions basically forcing them to collapse.
    For Cathay, it goes so much further. CX majority stakeholder is Swire. Swire is one the largest Coca-cola bottlers in mainland China, has an extensive property portfolio in China and has a bakery business in a number of large provinces. All those businesses would have also been destroyed if CX hadn't submitted and the entire Swire business of 150 years would have gone straight down the drain.

Reply
Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ... 7 12 13 14 15