Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Flipx99" data-source="post: 3245153" data-attributes="member: 562352">The US stock market doesn&#039;t work like that due to fragmenation of ownership.More people vote in presidential elections than on proxy ballots. It&#039;s just like how a person can be President of the United States with less than 50% of the popular vote (not including electoral college nonsense)....because some questions are not exactly yes/no questions.Also, there are also sphere&#039;s of influence...as funds that own ford may also own Mazda and they obviously wouldn&#039;t vote to oppose Ford.And here&#039;s more:In practice, though, controlling interest can be far less than that, as it is rare that 100% of a company&#039;s voting shareholders actively vote.In addition, a company that requires a 2/3 super-majority of shares to vote in favor of a motion, can grant, in effect, veto power to a minority shareholder or block of shareholders that own essentially 1/3 of the shares. Thus in some cases, a single entity can essentially maintain control, with only 33.4% of the outstanding shares. Ford Motor Company&#039;s ownership of 33.4% of Mazda is an example of a controlling interest with minority shareholding.You can actually determine proxy voting data if you are a shareholder or you pay for it. I neither own shares, nor am willing to pay....</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Flipx99, post: 3245153, member: 562352"] The US stock market doesn't work like that due to fragmenation of ownership. More people vote in presidential elections than on proxy ballots. It's just like how a person can be President of the United States with less than 50% of the popular vote (not including electoral college nonsense)....because some questions are not exactly yes/no questions. Also, there are also sphere's of influence...as funds that own ford may also own Mazda and they obviously wouldn't vote to oppose Ford. And here's more: In practice, though, controlling interest can be far less than that, as it is rare that 100% of a company's voting shareholders actively vote. In addition, a company that requires a 2/3 super-majority of shares to vote in favor of a motion, can grant, in effect, veto power to a minority shareholder or block of shareholders that own essentially 1/3 of the shares. Thus in some cases, a single entity can essentially maintain control, with only 33.4% of the outstanding shares. Ford Motor Company's ownership of 33.4% of Mazda is an example of a controlling interest with minority shareholding. You can actually determine proxy voting data if you are a shareholder or you pay for it. I neither own shares, nor am willing to pay.... [/QUOTE]

Verification