"Dennis Heidner" <[log in to unmask]> wrote

> One of the drawbacks of being a publicly owned company is the urge (or
> perceived absolute need) to do as the Wall Street bean counters
demand.

I think publicly owned companies have the same urge as privately owned
companies: to do as their *owners* demand.  I believe that the biggest
problem for publicly owned companies is the income tax which often
causes owners to push for "growth" to the exclusion of dividends.  It's
not that either is better or worse, but that the mix should not be
dictated by tax laws.

>So long as a business is still profitable it should not be shutdown.

I believe that this statement is too absolute; there is a natural and
beneficial tendency for resources to be allocated to their *most*
profitable use.  Why should businesses be expected to blindly devote
resources to lower profit producing segments?  When the automobile
displaced the horse, no amount of jiggering the "business model" or
fiddling with "expectations" would have justified keeping your
horseshoeing operation going when there were no horses to shoe.

<snip>

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *