[mathattack]

It’s a subtle distinction between labor and capital. And gets blurred by debt vs equity.

Who owns the company? The people who work there? The person who founded it? The people who the founders sold shares to? Or the people who lent it money?

Legally it’s the people who own shares. And if they miss their debt payments, it’s the lenders.

Companies can inform their shareholders “if you want to invest, here is how we operate differently.” Bezos and Buffet both do that in terms of defining focus and time horizons.

One may want to optimize for worker happiness first, but that’s not legal ownership. (Employee engagement is a predictor of shareholder return, but it’s hard to measure, and different from happiness)

[adamcstephens]

Except the quote isn’t about legal ownership it all. It’s about who has skin in the game, and who actually makes the company function.

The vast majority of shareholders have very little skin in the game, while the employees of the company absolutely have a lot of skin in the game. The employees depend on the company for their livelihood, whereas a shareholder is generally just trying to make money on their money.

[mathattack]

I view him as defining value as to accrue to stakeholders, with employees as primary.

One way to frame the question is “If the company gets a million dollar windfall, who should get it?” Employees? Owners? Even the most customer centric company won’t say a cash payment to customers, though they may say improving service or R and D.