Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 5th Jan 2012 11:25 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless This rumour is not new, nor is it particularly earth-shattering. However, with Windows Phone 7 failing to make a dent in the market place, and Nokia's Lumia 800 not making huge waves either, the rumour's been taken out of the shed again: Microsoft is supposedly acquiring Nokia's smartphone division later this year. Stephen Elop will resign from Nokia shortly afterwards.
Thread beginning with comment 502482
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
B. Janssen
Member since:
2006-10-11

Yes. Directors are legally required to protect shareholder value. They can be sued for failure to do so.


Thanks for your answer. I've read of shareholders suing companies and/or managers. But those cases, like the current Lloyds of England case, are resting on misleading or false reports. The lawsuits are not about making losses or not maximising shareholder value. I'm not sure how that would work anyway.

So I'm not sure if your interpretation of the lawsuits isn't a bit extreme. I really would like to see some printed material about this, not to play the stupid "facts & authority" card on you, but because I'd like to learn more about this issue and my Scroogle-Fu seems to be weak ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

Yes. Directors are legally required to protect shareholder value. They can be sued for failure to do so.

Thanks for your answer. I've read of shareholders suing companies and/or managers. But those cases, like the current Lloyds of England case, are resting on misleading or false reports. The lawsuits are not about making losses or not maximising shareholder value. I'm not sure how that would work anyway.

So I'm not sure if your interpretation of the lawsuits isn't a bit extreme. I really would like to see some printed material about this, not to play the stupid "facts & authority" card on you, but because I'd like to learn more about this issue and my Scroogle-Fu seems to be weak ;)

There's a world of difference between his original claim and the one italicized above. That leads me to believe that this person either hasn't read the law, is confused by a poor interpretation, or just simply doesn't understand it.

Whatever the case may be you're absolutely on point to ask for tangible evidence in support of the claim. However, you won't receive any because never in the history of business has any director(s) been in legal hot water for the claims made in the original post. His/her second claim is a little more in line with the truth but still poorly & too loosely worded. Being a crappy executive isn't a crime, unless there's malice involved.

Reply Parent Score: 1