Live data from Hacker News

Will the Long-Term Stock Exchange Make a Difference?

corpgov.law.harvard.edu

11–20 of 54 posts

Re: Will the Long-Term Stock Exchange Make a Difference?

#11
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The organizers are talking about tenure voting, "not proposing" means they have not formally filed with the SEC for permission.

i.e. there is no exchange that offers tenure voting, and it's not clear that there ever will be one.

Right, we're discussing the plans for the long term stock exchange. It hasn't been created yet.

Re: Will the Long-Term Stock Exchange Make a Difference?

#12
post #9

The prevailing narrative on this topic is "greedy investors only care about short-term profits". The spin is that visionary CEOs try to build long-term growth and innovation, but they're continuously stymied by Wall Street vultures. However the empirical evidence tells a very different story. Corporate managers have a demonstrated tendency towards wasteful ego-stroking empire building when not properly monitored. Thi…

There's certainly a lot to unpack with some of the recent focus on "what is a company for", in all it's varied forms. I think you're correct to focus on some of the empire building, and you're right that there are lots of notable examples of companies that do have latitude to invest in the future (amazon, but this is also true of other big companies like apple, microsoft, google). And I think that what gives away the gambit with this LTSE is that the dual-class structure is protected -- THAT is for empire building and protection of the fiefdom, full-stop.

That said, I like this Harvard piece a lot because the sidebars do point out that there is a pretty strong correlation between excess short-termism that came along with evolution of the shareholder preeminence theory. There's more than enough room here for everyone to be wrong in their own special, unique ways ;-).

Re: Will the Long-Term Stock Exchange Make a Difference?

#14
post #9

The prevailing narrative on this topic is "greedy investors only care about short-term profits". The spin is that visionary CEOs try to build long-term growth and innovation, but they're continuously stymied by Wall Street vultures. However the empirical evidence tells a very different story. Corporate managers have a demonstrated tendency towards wasteful ego-stroking empire building when not properly monitored. Thi…

I am glad someone brought this point up. It reminds me of the story of Drexel Burnham Lambert and Michael Milken.

Connie Bruck's book on him and his company* provides good context for how and why Milken and his junk bond raiders and the Gordon Gekkos were able to upend corporate America in the 80s. It's because the prior couple decades had fat cat CEOs and middle management that coasted on empires founded by the prior generation. Gekko's speech about Teldar Paper's middle management was not an inaccurate metaphor. There is a trend now that executive tenures are getting shorter, no doubt in part because many are now held to higher standards than many in the 60s and 70s.

There are founders who start companies with bad intentions of using the company as a financial vehicle to funnel money to themselves with as little work as possible, as opposed to founders who start companies to create external value for humanity. The first set of founders and CEOs should be constrained.

All that said, I am still pro-Long Term Stock Exchange because there are issues with the quarterly cadence and high-frequency trading. Don't know if LTSE will be the solution but I support experimentation.

* https://www.amazon.com/Predators-Ball-Burnham-JunkBond-Raide...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/23/business/dealbook/ceo-ten...

Re: Will the Long-Term Stock Exchange Make a Difference?

#15
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i.e. there is no exchange that offers tenure voting, and it's not clear that there ever will be one.

Right, we're discussing the plans for the long term stock exchange. It hasn't been created yet.

It sounds like the article is about the (proper noun) Long Term Stock Exchange, and whether or not it will make a difference. I tend to think of problems like that in the context of first asking "what is the Long Term Stock Exchange?" At the moment, at best it's a marketing ploy that advertises emphasis on long-termism, but without any approvals to do anything that they think supports long-termism. And the ideas they want to implement don't look feasible from a legal perspective. So, knowing these things, will it make a difference?

Re: Will the Long-Term Stock Exchange Make a Difference?

#16
post #9

The prevailing narrative on this topic is "greedy investors only care about short-term profits". The spin is that visionary CEOs try to build long-term growth and innovation, but they're continuously stymied by Wall Street vultures. However the empirical evidence tells a very different story. Corporate managers have a demonstrated tendency towards wasteful ego-stroking empire building when not properly monitored. Thi…

> Regular quarterly targets are an important part of management discipline.

This boils down to "having goals is important", which is certainly true, but most of us have seen managers try to improve quarterly numbers at the expense of company health. The effect is pronounced enough that people time purchases to be near other companies end of quarter, knowing they'll get a better deal.

Re: Will the Long-Term Stock Exchange Make a Difference?

#17
Whenever a CEO complains about quarterly accountability I ask them “would you like your direct reports to check in with you once a year?” It is ironic as management move towards real-time 24/7 dashboards to track key metrics, every 3 months is viewed as an inappropriate timeframe to judge progress or lack thereof.

The fact is public market investors are desperate to find high return places to invest capital. There is a shortage not a glut of long term opportunities to invest capital at an adequate rate of return. Companies that can do so are well rewarded by the marketplace. Those that aren’t either aren’t generating adequate returns on invested capital or are unable to communicate their prospects.

Re: Will the Long-Term Stock Exchange Make a Difference?

#18
post #9

The prevailing narrative on this topic is "greedy investors only care about short-term profits". The spin is that visionary CEOs try to build long-term growth and innovation, but they're continuously stymied by Wall Street vultures. However the empirical evidence tells a very different story. Corporate managers have a demonstrated tendency towards wasteful ego-stroking empire building when not properly monitored. Thi…

> Regular quarterly targets are an important part of management discipline. This boils down to "having goals is important", which is certainly true, but most of us have seen managers try to improve quarterly numbers at the expense of company health. The effect is pronounced enough that people time purchases to be near other companies end of quarter, knowing they'll get a better deal.

I accept that but ANY measured goals will be games as a fairly universal principle of human organization. If you shift accountability to annual the incentives to game increase because you have a whole year before you need to fess up.

Re: Will the Long-Term Stock Exchange Make a Difference?

#19
One issue is that its difficult for companies or anybody to plan for the long term. 12 years ago no one had a smart phone. Internet shopping was rare. House prices only went up. China was a trusted trading partner.

How are you supposed to plan for the long term, when you can't even see what is going to change in the next 5 years? It makes sense to keep current customers happy and spend most of time planning for next year or two.

Re: Will the Long-Term Stock Exchange Make a Difference?

#20
post #9

The prevailing narrative on this topic is "greedy investors only care about short-term profits". The spin is that visionary CEOs try to build long-term growth and innovation, but they're continuously stymied by Wall Street vultures. However the empirical evidence tells a very different story. Corporate managers have a demonstrated tendency towards wasteful ego-stroking empire building when not properly monitored. Thi…

> Regular quarterly targets are an important part of management discipline. This boils down to "having goals is important", which is certainly true, but most of us have seen managers try to improve quarterly numbers at the expense of company health. The effect is pronounced enough that people time purchases to be near other companies end of quarter, knowing they'll get a better deal.

> most of us have seen managers try to improve quarterly numbers at the expense of company health

Yep, this does happen. The point though, is to let shareholders rather than managers decide if this is a good choice. If managers are sacrificing the long-term health of the company, shareholders can vote them out or choose to sell their stake.

This is one of the downsides of the rise of passive investing and ETFs based on market cap - less votes are going into the system and holding people accountable.

Post reply on HN