Q: has anyone ever done a study that shows whether owning dual-share class companies fares better or worse than single-class? I can't seem to make up my mind on which, if any is better.
On the one hand, it is very democratic that all shareholders have an equal vote, but I can't help but think this leads to short-term quarter-by-quarter pursuits by management that may not benefit the long-term health of a company.
On the other hand, a concentration of voting rights by a small minority of shareholders could disregard the interests of subordinate holders yet allow for better strategic longer-term planning without having to worry about a populist revolt.
Do professional investors prefer one structure vs another?
Do you favour one over the other in general or does it have to be case-by-case?
On the one hand, it is very democratic that all shareholders have an equal vote, but I can't help but think this leads to short-term quarter-by-quarter pursuits by management that may not benefit the long-term health of a company.
On the other hand, a concentration of voting rights by a small minority of shareholders could disregard the interests of subordinate holders yet allow for better strategic longer-term planning without having to worry about a populist revolt.
Do professional investors prefer one structure vs another?
Do you favour one over the other in general or does it have to be case-by-case?