Re:WeWork’s CEO Makes Millions as Landlord to WeWork
by hendzen on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @10:06AM
(#18921395)
I'm not opposed to the use of multi-class shares in private companies, but for public companies I think that they should be phased out in line with the proposal from the SEC commissioner's speech. The self-dealing in the OP is another matter entirely -- and potentially worthy of a shareholder lawsuit for breach of fiduciary duty.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:WeWork’s CEO Makes Millions as Landlord to WeWork
by scarface74 on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @10:18AM
(#18921509)
There are two sides to the coin, a good founder/CEO that has a controlling interest in the company can make long term strategic plans without fear of repercussions from short sighted investors.
Re:WeWork’s CEO Makes Millions as Landlord to WeWork
by mfoy_ on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @10:22AM
(#18921551)
But you can be a good founder/CEO and have a controlling interest in the company without using multi-class shares if you simply retain the majority of shares.
Problems such as the one mentioned in this article start occurring when multi-class share schemes start allowing the founder to effectively sell off most of the company while still retaining total control.
Re:WeWork’s CEO Makes Millions as Landlord to WeWork
by hendzen on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @10:26AM
(#18921590)
Read the SEC commissioner's speech that I linked, seriously. He doesn't propose banning them entirely, just phasing them out over a period of time. Clearly there is a flipside to carte blanche founder control when the CEO/Founder is underperforming yet can't be removed (e.g. Evan Spiegel).
Do you think Mark Zuckerberg's children should retain majority control of Facebook after he dies?
Re:WeWork’s CEO Makes Millions as Landlord to WeWork
by anticensor on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @02:17PM
(#18924014)
Solution: Disallow inheritance of company shares.