= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
dmf comments on Call for information, examples, case studies and analysis: votes and shareholder resolutions v.s. divestment for social and environmental outcomes - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Comments (33)
This is because most people who study finance would put a very high probability on the consequences being zero. If my college refuses to buy from a firm it hurts that firm a little, but if it refuses to buy stock in a firm it does that firm zero harm. The best evidence is that while firms frequently advertise to get people to buy their products, they almost never advertise to get people to buy their stock. The value of a firm's stock is determined by what the big players in the market think are the long-term fundamentals of this stock.
I've seen adds that I suspect were actually targeting potential investors. Granted this was followed by the company in question exploding spectacularly a few years later with the executives being charged with fraud.