Intermarkets' Privacy Policy
Support


Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!



Recent Entries
Absent Friends
Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups


Texas MoMe 2024: 10/18/2024-10/19/2024 Corsicana,TX
Contact Ben Had for info





















Mid-Morning Art Thread | Main | Scottish Speech Police Say They Will Not Arrest J.K. Rowling, Finding Her Speech "Not Criminal"
April 03, 2024

Wednesday Morning Rant

mannixape2.jpg

Pass Through?

An increasingly common theme over the past several years has been the imposition of progressive policies on the business world. There is the normal alphabet soup of acronyms and terms associated with this. DEI and ESG are the most common, but there are also the old standbys of "climate conscious" and similar older phrases that have been displaced by the new DEI/ESG environment. The progression of DEI and ESG through the business world has many causes, but one cause is institutional demands.

It is pointed out endlessly that much of this profit-destroying - and more importantly, culture-destroying - activity is approved by institutional shareholders. When asking, "who owns Company X," the answer "the usual suspects" typically applies. Alphabet's top three shareholders are Vanguard, Blackrock and State Street. Ford's top three are ... Vanguard, Blackrock and State Street. Proctor and Gamble? Same. This is common. Look at any stock and the odds are good that several of a dozen or so companies make appearances in the top 5 shareholders.


Those institutions own the shares, but they don't own those shares for their own benefit or with their own capital. Vanguard isn't sitting on and investing $8 trillion of its own money and assets. The money and assets belong to Vanguard's customers. Vanguard and others like it aggregate their own customers' capital, make investment decisions, etc. - and wind up as the owners of record and gain enormous institutional power because they get to vote those shares as they see fit. The major investment houses get to direct corporate policy across publicly-traded companies, but they don't actually own many shares in their own right.

What would happen if those those votes were transferred to the customers who own the capital? Would a pass-through voting scheme within the investment houses help break institutional power? What would happen if share votes were proportionally allocated to the fund's actual capital owners based on the share of fund capital that the customer owns, then aggregated for final voting by the institution?

For example, the investment house informs its customers of an election, provides the ballot and vote recommendation (they are advisors, after all) and the customer votes or doesn't. For votes returned, the investment house aggregates them to determine how it must vote the shares held by the investment house. For unreturned ballots (the fund investor does not vote), the vote is not cast. If owners of only 25% of a fund's capital return ballots, then only 25% of fund's shares in the company get voted.

Most shares will probably go unvoted in this scheme and institutional power remains where it is, except with more paperwork. Where it would make a potential difference, however, is during controversy. If an investor or interest group wants to see changes in a company's board, they don't have to break the institutions - they just have to market and argue their case to the real shareholders. What changes could we possibly have already seen at the likes of AB-InBev, Meta, Disney and the like if the actual owners of institutional capital got a say in the vote?

It's entirely possible that such a scheme would be a nightmarish disaster with loads of unintended consequences that make everything worse, even possibly concentrating institutional power thanks to non-returned ballots. There are many obvious potential downsides to a change like this, and likely a whole mess of liability that would need to be sorted out, and plenty of opportunity for fraud.

But pass-through voting or something like it could possibly help break the institutional stranglehold on corporate governance. What else might?

digg this
posted by Joe Mannix at 11:00 AM

| Access Comments




Recent Comments
Skip: "Tolle Lege ..."

Ciampino - Vitreous Humour is funny glass #30: "Youth soccer game is canceled after horde of migra ..."

We've seen it before : "Don't even start with them. You'll get hooked. ..."

Way, Way Downriver [/i][/b]: ""Subordinance." Without an edit function, you wil ..."

Yudhishthira's Dice: "Some of Norm Macdonald's funny material was bashin ..."

Quarter Twenty : "Nissan never took the Z80 past the concept stage. ..."

Biden's Dog sniffs a whole lotta malarkey, : "Men make the best women. Posted by: And always co ..."

Ciampino - Vitreous Humour is funny glass #29: "299 Just as long as we're not going to flounder ar ..."

fd: ""If we had an edit function this place would be in ..."

And always come in first place : "Men make the best women. ..."

Its Always Been This Way: "[i]People here are mocking the narrative and those ..."

I am the Shadout Mapes, the Housekeeper: "Just as long as we're not going to flounder around ..."

Recent Entries
Search


Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
Powered by
Movable Type 2.64