They just leave LipBu no choice
11 replies (most recent on top)
Nice try but It’s a no win situation. You would win this case in any court except in Delaware. That is why so many corporations are incorporated in Delaware. including Intel.
Hmmm? All this talk about Ford stopping dividends under the guise of expanding the company (to sooo generously create more jobs and increase wages) I.E. keep his monopoly going and shut out the Dodge brothers……….This sounds a lot like what Intel is doing right now.. Any Dodge boys in the audience want to start a lawsuit? The courts saw through this bullsh-t way back n 1919
Let’s not overlook the fact that even though Ford tried to squeeze the shareholders mainly (Doge brothers) from profit to keep them from becoming competition.
DODGE made better faster cars.
Detroit MOPAR always wins Baby!
You are a corporate tool and you’re being used.. Let me guess Anerican college MBA?
This common but mistaken belief is almost invariably supported by reference to the Michigan Supreme Court's 1919 opinion in Dodge v. Ford Motor Co. Dodge is often misread or mistaught as setting a legal rule of shareholder wealth maximization. This was not and is not the law. Shareholder wealth maximization is a standard of conduct for officers and directors, not a legal mandate. The business judgment rule [which was also upheld in this decision] protects many decisions that deviate from this standard. This is one reading of Dodge. If this is all the case is about, however, it isn't that interesting. The rule of wealth maximization for shareholders is virtually impossible to enforce as a practical matter. The rule is aspirational, except in odd cases. As long as corporate directors and CEOs claim to be maximizing profits for shareholders, they will be taken at their word, because it is impossible to refute these corporate officials' self-serving assertions about their motives.
a clueless anon spewed the following nonsense:
I hate to break it to you, but you clearly don't even understand the history of USA.
Go read about the court case:
Dodge v. Ford Motor Co., 204 Mich 459; 170 NW 668 (1919)
Leeks pair bond best with potatoes for soup.
We knew you were an indoctrinated tool the moment you regurgitated the phrase: “ publicly traded companies exist to make money for investors.” Do they throw you bones from the top once and awhile for being a good boy? Go fu-k yourself.
@a9... "leek" is a vegetable... If you are just now figuring out Intel, or anyone else, doesn't give a f-ck about employees than you might be one of Intel's leeks. Let me explain it to you, publicly traded companies exist to make money for investors. Once a company stops doing this it over for them. Intel has been losing money for too long. LBT will sell off what can be sold while trying to recover the core business. If he can't pull off a turnaround to some sort of profitability the core business will be broken up and sold off too. In this entire process employees will not be a priority with the exception of the process of shedding them. In this case the employees will be a top priority which is happening now. BTW, if you somehow make it through the next culling standby for additional phases of headcount reduction.
Are you saying that, even if not planned, the Bloomberg article would force a layoff? That’s a special kind of stupid. lol
You don’t have to pay the media to get them to run with leaks, what are you on about?
This was an Intel “leek”. They pay the media to make this happen all the time. It’s what corporations do when they have no ba--s. It’s also proof that Intel really don’t give a fu-k about any of their employees.