The Briefing Room
State Chapters => Florida => Topic started by: libertybele on July 22, 2023, 02:02:59 pm
-
Florida pensions get crushed! - Great. 8888crybaby **nononono*
DeSantis takes aim at Bud Light as state pensions crushed by company's decline: 'There's got to be penalties'
Republican presidential candidate Gov. Ron DeSantis said the state of Florida is launching an inquiry into Bud Light and InBev which, he said, could lead to a lawsuit. The Florida governor told "Jesse Watters Primetime" Thursday that businesses should be penalized for prioritizing "social agendas" over shareholders after Florida pension funds took huge losses due to the beermaker's decline.
DeSantis is asking the head of the State Board of Administration (SBA) to review its holdings of AB InBev, citing the ongoing decline of its subsidiary company Bud Light.
In a letter sent to SBA Executive Director Lamar Taylor, DeSantis speculated that AB InBev may have "breached legal duties" to its shareholders by partnering with transgender activist Dylan Mulvaney and pushing "radical social ideologies."
"It has come to my attention that the State Board of Administration (SBA) currently holds global equity assets with Anheuser-Busch InBev (AB InBev)," the governor wrote in the Thursday letter. "As you well know, AB InBev's performance has plummeted since its decision to associate its Bud Light brand with radical social ideologies. That fateful decision has transformed America's formerly best-selling beer — and one of InBev's best-performing assets — into a commercial pariah. InBev's losses have been staggering." ...........
https://www.foxnews.com/media/desantis-takes-aim-bud-light-state-pensions-crushed-company-decline-got-penalties
-
The Florida governor told "Jesse Watters Primetime" Thursday that businesses should be penalized for prioritizing "social agendas" over shareholders after Florida pension funds took huge losses due to the beermaker's decline.
@libertybele
Say WHAT?????
Florida does NOT own any beer companies. Their pension funds MIGHT own STOCK in some corporations,but they are no more guaranteed a profit than private investors are guaranteed a profit.
Ya pays yore monies and ya takes yore chances,jist lak eberbodie else.
Is it even remotely possible he doesn't understand this?
-
IMO, a shareholders' lawsuit against InBev should have been filed months ago over this blatant, in-your-face violation of fiduciary duty.
-
@libertybele
Say WHAT?????
Florida does NOT own any beer companies. Their pension funds MIGHT own STOCK in some corporations,but they are no more guaranteed a profit than private investors are guaranteed a profit.
Ya pays yore monies and ya takes yore chances,jist lak eberbodie else.
Is it even remotely possible he doesn't understand this?
The only person who doesn't understand how things work here is you. Every shareholder, no matter how small their share, is owed certain duties by the management of the company in which they own shares. Since the State of Florida, through its pension plans, owns shares of AB, they are entitled to have their rights as a shareholder vindicated.
That is such fundamental law that even you should know that. So what's your excuse?
Of course, if it were Trump in charge of these funds, he'd simply have them declare bankruptcy, and stiff all the pensioners depending on them for their benefits.
-
The only person who doesn't understand how things work here is you. Every shareholder, no matter how small their share, is owed certain duties by the management of the company in which they own shares. Since the State of Florida, through its pension plans, owns shares of AB, they are entitled to have their rights as a shareholder vindicated.
@Kamaji
Blah,blah,blah.
That is such fundamental law that even you should know that. So what's your excuse?
Well,MY excuse is I am not under the impression they OWN the company. They just own STOCK in the company. Get someone to explain the difference to you.
-
@Kamaji
Blah,blah,blah.
Well,MY excuse is I am not under the impression they OWN the company. They just own STOCK in the company. Get someone to explain the difference to you.
:mauslaff:
Wait, wait, wait: @sneakypete sez: a shareholder is not an owner of the company in which they own stock
:mauslaff: :mauslaff:
-
IMO, a shareholders' lawsuit against InBev should have been filed months ago over this blatant, in-your-face violation of fiduciary duty.
***agree
-
IMO, a shareholders' lawsuit against InBev should have been filed months ago over this blatant, in-your-face violation of fiduciary duty.
:thumbsup:
-
Well,MY excuse is I am not under the impression they OWN the company. They just own STOCK in the company. Get someone to explain the difference to you.
No @sneakypete , @Kamaji is right. Part of corporate law is the fact that the corporation has a fiduciary obligation to their stockholders - They HAVE TO TRY to optimize their stockholders' profits. That's their job, and their responsibility. And that is backed up by both stockholders' guidance meetings and civil law.
In fact they DO own the company, or a part thereof... That's what their investment in the stocks means.
And there are consequences for non-performance.
-
IMO, a shareholders' lawsuit against InBev should have been filed months ago over this blatant, in-your-face violation of fiduciary duty.
That's right... But it's coming. The stockholders get their voice at the end of this month.
-
No @sneakypete , @Kamaji is right. Part of corporate law is the fact that the corporation has a fiduciary obligation to their stockholders - They HAVE TO TRY to optimize their stockholders' profits. That's their job, and their responsibility. And that is backed up by both stockholders' guidance meetings and civil law.
In fact they DO own the company, or a part thereof... That's what their investment in the stocks means.
And there are consequences for non-performance.
@roamer_1
Owning a PART of a company is NOT the same thing as owning a company. That is why they are called "stock owners" instead of owners.
-
And there are consequences for non-performance.
@roamer_1
Owning a PART of a company is NOT the same thing as owning a company. That is why they are called "stock owners" instead of owners.
Wow. You really don't know anything, do you. The shares issued by a company represent ownership of the company. A shareholder is an owner of the company, just as much as each joint owner of a jointly-owned parcel of real estate is an owner of that real estate.
-
And there are consequences for non-performance.
@roamer_1
Owning a PART of a company is NOT the same thing as owning a company. That is why they are called "stock owners" instead of owners.
@sneakypete
When the stockholders together own a significant percentage of the company (and they do in this case), they have a good bit of power and contract rights they can exercise in the interest of prtecting their investment.
Such an egregious destruction of value as this case will be a slam-dunk... DeSantis is right. And you are going to see it happen, starting with the stockholders' quarterly meeting at the end of this month. They have the power to depose the entire board and elect a new one, and I bet they will call for the CEO's head.
And the civil suits are just beginning.
Watch and see.
-
Wow. You really don't know anything, do you. The shares issued by a company represent ownership of the company. A shareholder is an owner of the company, just as much as each joint owner of a jointly-owned parcel of real estate is an owner of that real estate.
That's right.
-
Wow. You really don't know anything, do you. The shares issued by a company represent ownership of the company. A shareholder is an owner of the company, just as much as each joint owner of a jointly-owned parcel of real estate is an owner of that real estate.
@Kamaji
I tell ya what,bubba. Why don't you take your single stock ownership into a GM board meeting and demand control?
Stockholders OWN AN INDIVIDUAL PORTION OF A CORPORATION,NOT the freaking Corporation.
-
@sneakypete
When the stockholders together own a significant percentage of the company (and they do in this case), they have a good bit of power and contract rights they can exercise in the interest of prtecting their investment.
Such an egregious destruction of value as this case will be a slam-dunk... DeSantis is right. And you are going to see it happen, starting with the stockholders' quarterly meeting at the end of this month. They have the power to depose the entire board and elect a new one, and I bet they will call for the CEO's head.
And the civil suits are just beginning.
Watch and see.
Exactly.
-
@sneakypete
When the stockholders together own a significant percentage of the company (and they do in this case), they have a good bit of power and contract rights they can exercise in the interest of prtecting their investment.
Such an egregious destruction of value as this case will be a slam-dunk... DeSantis is right. And you are going to see it happen, starting with the stockholders' quarterly meeting at the end of this month. They have the power to depose the entire board and elect a new one, and I bet they will call for the CEO's head.
And the civil suits are just beginning.
Watch and see.
The civil suits are just beginning and rightfully so.
-
@sneakypete
When the stockholders together own a significant percentage of the company (and they do in this case), they have a good bit of power and contract rights they can exercise in the interest of prtecting their investment.
@roamer_1 "Stockholders,plural,have power. The ONLY "power" an individual stockholder has is the option to sell his or her stock,or to pledge it to another stockholder to build influence with the board.
Such an egregious destruction of value as this case will be a slam-dunk... DeSantis is right. And you are going to see it happen, starting with the stockholders' quarterly meeting at the end of this month. They have the power to depose the entire board and elect a new one, and I bet they will call for the CEO's head.
There can be no question about a majority ownership controlling the board,and by extension,the corporation.
And the civil suits are just beginning.
Watch and see.
I suspect you are right about this. I have never heard of a stockholder who is a fan of seeing their stock lose value.
I guess there is a possibility of the Disney Family still owning a majority of the voting stock,but I doubt it. From what I have read,they are airheads born into wealth,with no conception of not being wealthy. They really seem to think that poverty can never happen to them.
-
@roamer_1 "Stockholders,plural,have power. The ONLY "power" an individual stockholder has is the option to sell his or her stock,or to pledge it to another stockholder to build influence with the board.
@sneakypete
That depends upon how much stock the single individual owns. A single individual with a single stock... you're right. He has the same rights as the big guns, but his investment, and therefore his share, is insignificant. But a single owner with, let's say, an 8% share in something like this would be able to swing a pretty big hammer.
And we are talking about the big guns here... investment firms and hedge funds, whose interests would be the same as the small stock holder - so by their intent, the small guy's funds are protected just the same.
There can be no question about a majority ownership controlling the board,and by extension,the corporation.
I suspect you are right about this. I have never heard of a stockholder who is a fan of seeing their stock lose value.
Right... but it is more complicated than that... especially corporations within corporations.... But they ALL have a fiduciary duty to the stockholders. And if those stockholders don't have the power to directly address the board, they still have every right to bring forward a class action civil suit.
Either which way, the excrement is about to hit the oscillating air mover. The stockholders will get their 30% back in blood or treasure.
I guess there is a possibility of the Disney Family still owning a majority of the voting stock,but I doubt it. From what I have read,they are airheads born into wealth,with no conception of not being wealthy. They really seem to think that poverty can never happen to them.
This is Tranheiser-Busch-In-Bev, not Disney...
Though Disney ain't faring too well against the good Florida Governor either.
-
Exactly.
By the time this is over, stakeholder corporatism will be on the ropes.
And that's awesome.
:beer:
-
This is Tranheiser-Busch-In-Bev, not Disney...
@roamer_1
Huh?
-
@roamer_1
Huh?
:mauslaff:
Uh, the story is about Florida suing the corporation that owns Bud Light, not Disney.
-
The civil suits are just beginning and rightfully so.
That's right. And this is a hallmark case. The kind of thing that will be taught in business schools for a hundred years. Budweiser/Bud Light as a brand is destroyed. Tranheiser-Busch as a brand is destroyed. And now come the wolves and the vultures...
In-Bev may have to get rid of them and cut their losses. It's getting that bad.
And that's an amazement. :beer:
-
@roamer_1
Huh?
@sneakypete
Read the OP title. This is about Bud Light (Anheuser-Busch-InBev)... Not about Disney.
DeSantis is taking on ANOTHER ONE. WOO!
-
@sneakypete
Read the OP title. This is about Bud Light (Anheuser-Busch-InBev)... Not about Disney.
DeSantis is taking on ANOTHER ONE. WOO!
I'm glad and he should. It's hitting FL pensions which isn't a good thing. This is jeopardizing the FL retirement system; those who have saved for retirement and those who are now receiving their pension money.
Hopefully he'll stop it before the FL pension system goes broke.
Pensions as a whole nationwide aren't doing all that great; many are not funded as they should be. Last statistics indicate that Florida's pension system only has enough money to meet about 83 percent of its projected liabilities. The issue with Bud isn't helping.
I'm not sure, but I would think that this is affecting other state pensions as well.
-
I'm glad and he should. It's hitting FL pensions which isn't a good thing. This is jeopardizing the FL retirement system; those who have saved for retirement and those who are now receiving their pension money.
Hopefully he'll stop it before the FL pension system goes broke.
Pensions as a whole nationwide aren't doing all that great; many are not funded as they should be. Last statistics indicate that Florida's pension system only has enough money to meet about 83 percent of its projected liabilities. The issue with Bud isn't helping.
I'm not sure, but I would think that this is affecting other state pensions as well.
That's all right - and I am sorry if it is effecting you and yourn.
It will be interesting to see if InBev starts getting hit in the law suits, which they will, because it's looking like AB might be picked clean.
-
I'm glad and he should. It's hitting FL pensions which isn't a good thing. This is jeopardizing the FL retirement system; those who have saved for retirement and those who are now receiving their pension money.
Hopefully he'll stop it before the FL pension system goes broke.
Pensions as a whole nationwide aren't doing all that great; many are not funded as they should be. Last statistics indicate that Florida's pension system only has enough money to meet about 83 percent of its projected liabilities. The issue with Bud isn't helping.
I'm not sure, but I would think that this is affecting other state pensions as well.
@libertybele
Wouldn't the feral goobermint jump in to bail out Fl if this happened?
Asking because I don't know.
-
By the time this is over, stakeholder corporatism will be on the ropes.
And that's awesome.
:beer:
I certainly hope so. No more throwing money at or making decisions based on ESG or DEI crap.
-
@libertybele
Wouldn't the feral goobermint jump in to bail out Fl if this happened?
Asking because I don't know.
I don't truly know the answer but it is doubtful. There are other state pensions funds that are in worse trouble.
There are only a handful of state pension funds that are fully funded. Kentucky is only 47% funded.
https://equable.org/pension-plan-funded-ratio-rankings-2022/
-
Retirement? What the heck is that? (Asks the self employed till death me).
I retired early for health reasons. :shrug: We don't take vacations like most retired people or dine out all the time. Retirement for us is not struggling with our health while working. I am very thankful though.
-
The big-dog investors in large companies tend to be institutions, e.g. banks, insurance companies and pension funds.
-
I certainly hope so. No more throwing money at or making decisions based on ESG or DEI crap.
That's right! :beer:
And that's what this is all really about. There's a rumble starting deep in the ground with this whole dang thing... Nobody started this Bud Light thing. No organized Right Wing thing going on here. Folks are just fed the hell up with it, and Bud Light was the last straw. They sponsored a twink tranny and blew half their own face off...
Men of all kinds just up and hollered nuff... And then the womenfolk did the same going after Target. It was organic - a groundswell.
But now it's coming down to the nitty gritty. So you make money or do you make beer? If you make money you can impose all that crap on your customers and get away with it.
Bbbbut - and it's a big hairy butt - You gotta make beer to make money. And you can't make folks buy it. No beer, no money. No money, no stock price. It all falls down.
And harvard trained CEOs and ESG minded sales executives are finding out a very, very valuable lesson. One they should have learned first:
The customer is always right.
Period.
-
I don't truly know the answer but it is doubtful. There are other state pensions funds that are in worse trouble.
There are only a handful of state pension funds that are fully funded. Kentucky is only 47% funded.
https://equable.org/pension-plan-funded-ratio-rankings-2022/
@libertybele
Thanks,I had no idea.
Seems like the press MIGHT have wanted to cover that,doesn't it? It sure seems like a crisis to ME.
-
Retirement? What the heck is that? (Asks the self employed till death me).
@Jack Russell
A large number of self-employed people are retired on SS.
-
Retirement? What the heck is that? (Asks the self employed till death me).
I heard that. And I like it. I surely hope to die with my boots on. :beer: :seeya:
-
It's a state issue, not federal.
@Jack Russell
Thanks!
-
The only person who doesn't understand how things work here is you. Every shareholder, no matter how small their share, is owed certain duties by the management of the company in which they own shares. Since the State of Florida, through its pension plans, owns shares of AB, they are entitled to have their rights as a shareholder vindicated.
That is such fundamental law that even you should know that. So what's your excuse?
Of course, if it were Trump in charge of these funds, he'd simply have them declare bankruptcy, and stiff all the pensioners depending on them for their benefits.
Yup
And look at the adolescent type reply you got following your fact filled post
-
No @sneakypete , @Kamaji is right. Part of corporate law is the fact that the corporation has a fiduciary obligation to their stockholders - They HAVE TO TRY to optimize their stockholders' profits. That's their job, and their responsibility. And that is backed up by both stockholders' guidance meetings and civil law.
In fact they DO own the company, or a part thereof... That's what their investment in the stocks means.
And there are consequences for non-performance.
@roamer_1
Owning a PART (a share) of a company is NOT the same thing as OWNING A COMPANY.
-
@sneakypete
When the stockholders together own a significant percentage of the company (and they do in this case), they have a good bit of power and contract rights they can exercise in the interest of prtecting their investment.
Such an egregious destruction of value as this case will be a slam-dunk... DeSantis is right. And you are going to see it happen, starting with the stockholders' quarterly meeting at the end of this month. They have the power to depose the entire board and elect a new one, and I bet they will call for the CEO's head.
And the civil suits are just beginning.
Watch and see.
@roamer_1
The part in bold is VERY true,but we have yahoos here who seem to be drunk on the luv of DeSanctimonious who seem to be trying to claim that owing one share is the same as owning the company,and it just ain't so.
-
:mauslaff:
Uh, the story is about Florida suing the corporation that owns Bud Light, not Disney.
@Kamaji
And......?
-
It's a state issue, not federal.
@Jack Russell
Thanks,that does make a difference.
-
That's right! :beer:
And that's what this is all really about. There's a rumble starting deep in the ground with this whole dang thing... Nobody started this Bud Light thing. No organized Right Wing thing going on here. Folks are just fed the hell up with it, and Bud Light was the last straw. They sponsored a twink tranny and blew half their own face off...
Men of all kinds just up and hollered nuff... And then the womenfolk did the same going after Target. It was organic - a groundswell.
But now it's coming down to the nitty gritty. So you make money or do you make beer? If you make money you can impose all that crap on your customers and get away with it.
Bbbbut - and it's a big hairy butt - You gotta make beer to make money. And you can't make folks buy it. No beer, no money. No money, no stock price. It all falls down.
And harvard trained CEOs and ESG minded sales executives are finding out a very, very valuable lesson. One they should have learned first:
The customer is always right.
Period.
Amen.
-
Yup
And look at the adolescent type reply you got following your fact filled post
TBPH, I didn't expect anything different.