6 ms·

People used to go to jail for this type of shit. When we had fiscal oversight and corporate law.

by Craiggybear 14y ago

mseebach 14y ago
When has quarrels between the board and the CEO of non-public companies ever been the concern of criminal law?
- jfoutz 14y ago
  Oh, mostly around the turn of the century with rail, oil, and steel trusts. Just for clarity, i'm not claiming anything like is happening now.
  - mseebach 14y ago
    Now you've tickled my curiosity. Do please elaborate?
    - jfoutz 14y ago
      I guess i don't have an example. apparently JP Morgan used to like to lock people in his library till he got his way - but this specific case is other bank owners, not his board http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1907 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1907 Andrew Carnegie negotiated deals between companies he controlled, collecting commission on both sides of the deals. I vaguely remember that being pretty contentious. False imprisonment and collusion are exiting, must have overshadowed the exact circumstances in my memory.
  - wpietri 14y ago
    Do you have an example? The bits that I recall are all government vs trust instead of board + government vs CEO.
- Craiggybear 14y ago
  When the other board members bring charges ... Which they might or might not, depending on the true financial picture of FB. I am certain I would take offence at 1bn being spent on my behalf without prior consultation. Its actually a criminal offence and possibly could construe false accounting. Do you know what those words mean? Spending money demands a paper trail and minuted meeting notes. Or used to. If you can now spend that amount without due ovetsight its no wonder we're financially shafted. He's not the Emporor. Bitch.
mikeryan 14y ago
This is still a privately held company. Everyone who owns shares know damn well that Zuck holds a controlling interest and can has the full authority and right to do these kinds of deals with minimal oversight. They've conceded fiscal oversight for a big payday.
damoncali 14y ago
On the contrary. When one straight up owns a controlling interest in the BOD, one gets to do whatever the fuck one wants.

People used to go to jail for this type of shit. When we had fiscal oversight and corporate law.

mseebach 14y ago

When has quarrels between the board and the CEO of non-public companies ever been the concern of criminal law?

jfoutz 14y ago
Oh, mostly around the turn of the century with rail, oil, and steel trusts. Just for clarity, i'm not claiming anything like is happening now.
- mseebach 14y ago
  Now you've tickled my curiosity. Do please elaborate?
  - jfoutz 14y ago
    I guess i don't have an example. apparently JP Morgan used to like to lock people in his library till he got his way - but this specific case is other bank owners, not his board http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1907 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1907 Andrew Carnegie negotiated deals between companies he controlled, collecting commission on both sides of the deals. I vaguely remember that being pretty contentious. False imprisonment and collusion are exiting, must have overshadowed the exact circumstances in my memory.
- wpietri 14y ago
  Do you have an example? The bits that I recall are all government vs trust instead of board + government vs CEO.
Craiggybear 14y ago
When the other board members bring charges ... Which they might or might not, depending on the true financial picture of FB. I am certain I would take offence at 1bn being spent on my behalf without prior consultation. Its actually a criminal offence and possibly could construe false accounting. Do you know what those words mean? Spending money demands a paper trail and minuted meeting notes. Or used to. If you can now spend that amount without due ovetsight its no wonder we're financially shafted. He's not the Emporor. Bitch.

mikeryan 14y ago

This is still a privately held company. Everyone who owns shares know damn well that Zuck holds a controlling interest and can has the full authority and right to do these kinds of deals with minimal oversight. They've conceded fiscal oversight for a big payday.

damoncali 14y ago

On the contrary. When one straight up owns a controlling interest in the BOD, one gets to do whatever the fuck one wants.