Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway Riding
You mean to understand yourself. You just contradicted yourself to redeem credibility.  Bottom line is if you have shareholders and they see it fit to restructure who's fault is that? the shareholders you seek'd in the first place. And who offers shares in the first place? Don't try to learn about this now for a forum!
BTW I made one comment on how Bain shouldn't be a topic or viewed as this devilish entity which it is portrayed as on ads and your still going back and forth. Nothing to see here. |
You are right I do not fully understand it - and I bet I have A LOT more experience/knowledge about the subject. I mean, I have a 20+ page law review article just on the topic of whether "business performance" means anything within the Boards duty to monitor. So please, enlighten me on where you get your corporate law acumen.
As to shareholders - first you need to classify if you mean institutional or individual, controlling or minority, preferred or common, etc. etc. etc.
When PE does leveraged buy outs, they do not come in saying they will fix stuff, they buy the shares on the open market and when they cross a certain percentage of ownership a whole slew of fun things begin to happen. That is why we have things called poison pills (shareholders rights plans) - the defense to a hostile takeover (go ahead look it up have fun figuring it out!).
I never said Bain was devilish, just that type of business experience is not what most people would want in a president. Again, look up Michael Milkin, Carl Icahn, T. Boone Pickens, any of these PE/Corporate Raider guys. Making money does not mean making better policy/jobs/etc. Again, his business sense is not whats best for the company (aka, the country) it is what is best for his own interest. So again, if you are cool with being sold out for an extra few dollars so be it.
10-24-2012, 08:00 AM
Hybrid Mode
