undefined | Better HN

0 pointsp0w3n3d3mo ago0 comments

If you are obliged by the investors too

0 comments

Not really. This is one of the things Google got right; organize your company so founders have a controlling interest and it doesn't matter fundamentally what the investors think, they can't steer the company.

At best, they are trading baseball cards with your corporate logo on them.

pfdietz3mo ago

> At best, they are trading baseball cards with your corporate logo on them.

Those baseball cards also come with some rights. The people running the company have a fiduciary responsibility to them. They cannot, for example, use the company as a piggybank.

shadowgovt3mo ago

But especially in the case of Google, those rights do not extend to setting the values, direction, or priorities of the company.

Nobody outside of the founders has enough of a controlling stake for that to be practically possible.

p0w3n3dOP3mo ago

I'm speaking about ESG which became somehow mandatory for investors at some point of time. Not mandatory in legal, but cultural sense

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

shadowgovt3mo ago

At best, they are trading baseball cards with your corporate logo on them.

pfdietz3mo ago

> At best, they are trading baseball cards with your corporate logo on them.

Those baseball cards also come with some rights. The people running the company have a fiduciary responsibility to them. They cannot, for example, use the company as a piggybank.

shadowgovt3mo ago

But especially in the case of Google, those rights do not extend to setting the values, direction, or priorities of the company.

Nobody outside of the founders has enough of a controlling stake for that to be practically possible.

p0w3n3dOP3mo ago

I'm speaking about ESG which became somehow mandatory for investors at some point of time. Not mandatory in legal, but cultural sense

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse