Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Then blame the board imo. They define the objectives for the CEO, the incentives for achieving them, and the governance framework for governing their execution. If shareholders want this “short term thinking” that always gets brought up, then they have every right to it.

Of course this “short term thinking” trope is just a meme that the armchair commentators like to pedal out. If the system was dysfunctional enough to prioritise short term profit seeking to this extent, then all a competitor would have to do to monopolise any market is do enough “long term thinking” to outlast all their failing competitors. Investors would notice this and reallocate their capital accordingly.

But none of this is what happens in reality. If anything I would say the market is over-interested in long term strategies. The popularity of the growth over profit model that we observe amongst most prolific capital allocators takes “long term thinking” to absurd lengths.



> If the system was dysfunctional enough to prioritise short term profit seeking to this extent, then all a competitor would have to do to monopolise any market is do enough “long term thinking” to outlast all their failing competitors.

isn't this exactly what's going on with Boeing?

> Airbus last year topped Boeing for the fifth straight year in the orders race, with 2,094 net orders and 735 delivered planes. Boeing had 1,314 net orders and delivered 528 aircraft.[0]

I 100% agree the majority of investors don't seem to take the long view, and that's been the case for a while.

[0] https://apnews.com/article/boeing-airbus-airline-safety-manu...


> Then blame the board imo.

The Board of Directors at most major corporations is made up largely of current or former executives, many of whom come from the same industry. It's in their personal interest to normalize lucrative and exploitable compensation plans.

You would also be shocked to know what people control the lion's share of investment dollars.


Its not like you have 30 competitors who can produce AH-64 Apache chopper equivalent out of blue with all support stuff required around it, its not perfect market and boeing c suite knows it very well.

Sure in 30 years they may be eventually pushed out but they can coast 2 generations of successful careers till then.


>Then blame the board imo

Half of them would look like job hoppers with such short tenures on their resume. Some of them have simultaneous executive positions at other companies.

If you want some evidence of short-term thinking not being a meme, it's probably that.


> If the system was dysfunctional enough to prioritise short term profit seeking to this extent, then all a competitor would have to do to monopolise any market is do enough “long term thinking” to outlast all their failing competitors.

This makes it sound like my broker, the finance community in general, or maybe the state is better able to handle long term thinking than our industry leaders, but why would anyone believe that? Aren’t they all looking quarter to quarter and retiring next year no matter how bad they wreck the company/economy/country?


Stock is sold and bought all the time with no tax. It's in the investor's intrest to sink a company for short-term profits. When the s*it hits the fan, they can sell the falling stock, short-sell even, to some clueless pension funds and invest the money in a competitor instead. When only one company remains, profit +++. This is how stock markets work. Why are you surprised?


Long term thinking is often incompatible with short term thinking. It doesn't matter if your company is long term sustainable if it's short term unsustainable. See dumping.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: