Re:Since becoming Meta, Facebook’s parent company has lost U...
by djbebs on Saturday October 29, 2022 @08:18AM
(#33383408)
There is no obligation
Re:Since becoming Meta, Facebook’s parent company has lost U...
by kasey_junk on Saturday October 29, 2022 @09:11AM
(#33383743)
Obligation isn’t the right word. There is an “expectation” and it’s enforced by the markets.
Re:Since becoming Meta, Facebook’s parent company has lost U...
by Cupertino95014 on Saturday October 29, 2022 @11:36AM
(#33384943)
Correct, sorry. It's "enforced" by people selling the stock, or, if they're really rich, trying to buy the company and force changes.
Re:Since becoming Meta, Facebook’s parent company has lost U...
by mumblemumble on Saturday October 29, 2022 @09:14AM
(#33383765)
I think that the commenter was asserting an ethical obligation, not a legal or contractual one.
In other words, it was a statement of opinion. You can't really [citation needed] opinions like that.
Re:Since becoming Meta, Facebook’s parent company has lost U...
by danielfoster on Saturday October 29, 2022 @02:58PM
(#33386958)
Publicly-traded companies are expected to act in the best interest of their shareholders, which includes the obligation to make the best use of free cash. This is Business Law 101.
Management is generally given huge leeway here and shareholders will usually vote with their feet as has happened with Meta.
Re:Since becoming Meta, Facebook’s parent company has lost U...
by Cupertino95014 on Saturday October 29, 2022 @03:42PM
(#33387328)
Correct. If you're a shareholder, you can either sue, while you have "standing," or you can just sell and preserve your money.
Even if you sue, you probably wouldn't win, and it would be horrendously expensive.
I'd love to see a source for this. What is the precise nature of this obligation, and who enforces it?