I didn't get that.
OK, Vanguard with BlackRick owns 16.22%. Far from 51% to have a total control over business decisions. As far as I understand, they hardly will even have any significant voice in that business with their miserable stake. All they could do is to sell their stakes and temporarily slightly lower the price of company stocks. But this will not interfere with business itself, and its profits, only create some short-lasting discomfort among owners.
Who owns the rest 83.78%? Who owns control stake? Who have majority over board of directors (or whatever top business authority in company)? Aren't top managers had specific education or belongs to specific group? Aren't entities that graduate MBAs today have some interesting mandatory course or whatever? Could MBA degree be retracted after graduating if somebody does not follow some rules, like attorney or MD degree could be retracted if a lawyer or a doctor will say or do something against narrative or consensus?
Looks like there is something else, much worse than simple proxy with small stakes everywhere, and that Vanguard/BlackRock boogiemen are just a distraction.
Also interesting that it become very common to say that BlackRock/Vanguard owns 90% of businesses, like they fully own and control them or at least have control stake. But that is not true, yes, they have stakes in 90% of businesses, but that stakes are toщ small to control that businesses. If you have 5-10% here and there you do not have control, you just have a little profit from multiple places.
I think there is something very fishy with that strange narrative about proxy funds that have insignificant stakes everywhere. They could be not only proxy for somebody money, but also proxy for narratives and distraction.
I didn't get that.
OK, Vanguard with BlackRick owns 16.22%. Far from 51% to have a total control over business decisions. As far as I understand, they hardly will even have any significant voice in that business with their miserable stake. All they could do is to sell their stakes and temporarily slightly lower the price of company stocks. But this will not interfere with business itself, and its profits, only create some short-lasting discomfort among owners.
Who owns the rest 83.78%? Who owns control stake? Who have majority over board of directors (or whatever top business authority in company)? Aren't top managers had specific education or belongs to specific group? Aren't entities that graduate MBAs today have some interesting mandatory course or whatever? Could MBA degree be retracted after graduating if somebody does not follow some rules, like attorney or MD degree could be retracted if a lawyer or a doctor will say or do something against narrative or consensus?
Looks like there is something else, much worse than simple proxy with small stakes everywhere, and that Vanguard/BlackRock boogiemen are just a distraction.
Also interesting that it become very common to say that BlackRock/Vanguard owns 90% of businesses, like they fully own and control them or at least have control stake. But that is not true, yes, they have stakes in 90% of businesses, but that stakes are to small to control that businesses. If you have 5-10% here and there you do not have control, you just have a little profit from multiple places.
I think there is something very fishy with that strange narrative about proxy funds that have insignificant stakes everywhere. They could be not only proxy for somebody money, but also proxy for narratives and distraction.
I didn't get that.
OK, Vanguard with BlackRick owns 16.22%. Far from 51% to have a total control over business decisions. As far as I understand, they hardly will even have any significant voice in that business with their miserable stake. All they could do is to sell their stakes and temporarily slightly lower the price of company stocks. But this will not interfere with business itself, and its profits, only create some short-lasting discomfort among owners.
Who owns the rest 83.78%? Who owns control stake? Who have majority over board of directors (or whatever top business authority in company)? Aren't top managers had specific education or belongs to specific group? Aren't entities that graduate MBAs today have some interesting mandatory course or whatever? Could MBA degree be retracted after graduating if somebody does not follow some rules, like attorney or MD degree could be retracted if a lawyer or a doctor will say or do something against narrative or consensus?
Looks like there is something else, much worse than simple proxy with small stakes everywhere, and that Vanguard/BlackRock boogiemans are just a distraction.
Also interesting that it become very common to say that BlackRock/Vanguard owns 90% of businesses, like they fully own and control them or at least have control stake. But that is not true, yes, they have stakes in 90% of businesses, but that stakes are to small to control that businesses. If you have 5-10% here and there you do not have control, you just have a little profit from multiple places.
I think there is something very fishy with that strange narrative about proxy funds that have insignificant stakes everywhere. They could be not only proxy for somebody money, but also proxy for narratives and distraction.