Shareholder Wealth Maximization

shareholder wealth maximization | Law Teacher
Home
Page 1 of 3
Services
Quote / Order Now
Quality
Law Help
Need help? 0115 966 7966

Enter your search terms...
About Us
Search
You are here: Law Teacher Business Law Essays Shareholder Wealth Maximization Law Essays
shareholder wealth maximization

To understand and make it clearer, we should pay attention to several definitions of shareholder,
stakeholder and theories of shareholder and stakeholder and what the differences between them are, and
what debates between them?
First, what is shareholder? According to the web page of defining the world of investing-Investor
Glossary, A shareholder is an individual or organization owning stock in a company. Shareholders have
a legal claim on a percentage of the company's earnings and assets, and share the same level of limited
liability as the company itself. In cases of bankruptcy, shareholders generally lose the entire value of their
holdings.
Next, what is stakeholder? According to Business dictionary.com, it is a person, a group, or an
organization that has a direct or indirect stake in an organization because it can affect or be affected by
the organizations actions, objectives and policies. Key stakeholders in a business organization include
creditors, customers, directors, employees, government (and its agencies),
owners (shareholders), suppliers, unions, and the community from which the business draws
its resources.
Form the financial point view, the objective of a firm is to maximize the wealth to the shareholders.
Nevertheless, nowadays people say that the wealth maximization is only focused on its shareholders.
The followings below are some views supporting and not supporting to demonstrate to the things above.
According to H. Jeff Smith (2003), Shareholder theory asserts that shareholder advances capital to a
companys managers, who are supposed to spend corporate funds only in ways that have been
authorized by the shareholders.
Furthermore, Milton Friedman (1970) is the man supporting this theory very much. He made the most
well-known version of the shareholder theory in the following passage in Capitalism and Freedom: In
such an economy [a free economy], there is one and only one social responsibility of business to use
its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of
the gamewithout deception or fraud. In his essay The Social Responsibility of Business Is To Increase
Its Profits Friedman gives a somewhat different statement of the theory: In a free-enterprise, private
property system, a corporate executive is an employee of the owners of the business. He has direct
responsibility to his employers. That responsibility is to conduct the business in accordance to with their
desires, which will generally be to make as much money as possible while conforming to the basic rules
of the society, both those embodied in law and in ethical custom.
One more view supporting this theory is posted by Todd Henderson (2010). He argued that while the duty
to maximize shareholder value may be a useful short hand for a corporate manager to think about how to
act on a day to day basis, this is not legally required or enforceable. The only constraint on board decision
making is a pair of duties the duty of care and the duty of loyalty.The duty of care requires boards to
be well informed and to make deliberate decisions after careful consideration of the issues. Importantly,
board members are entitled to rely on experts and corporate officers for their information, can easily
comply with duty of care obligations by spending shareholder money on lawyers and process, and, in any
event, are routinely indemnified against damages for any breaches of this duty. The duty of loyalty self
evidently requires board members to put the interests of the corporation ahead of their own personal
interest. And, Dodge v. Ford Motor Co., (1919) supposed corporations are organized and acted for
carrying on primarily profit of the stockholders. Directors are employed on behalf of owners, has
responsibility to bring more profit into strongbox of employers. They are simultaneously assigned power
and duty for making decision so as to reach purpose of proprietors.
Different with the above mentioned views, the stakeholder theory says that corporations should be run for
the benefit of all stakeholders, not just the shareholders (Thomas L. Carson -2003). Also, R. Edward
Freeman (2004) is the most prominent defender of the stakeholder theory. In his paper A Stakeholder
Theory of the Modern Corporation Freeman writes: Corporations shall be managed in the interests of its
stakeholder, defined as employees, financiers, customers and commodities.
Moreover, in an earlier paper written together with William Evan, Freeman states as follows: The
corporation should be managed for the benefit of its stakeholder: its customers, suppliers, owners,
employees, and local communities. The rights of these groups must be ensured, and further, the groups
must participate in some sense in decisions that substantially affect their welfare. Management bears a
fiduciary relationship to stakeholders and to the corporation as an abstract entity. It must act in the
interests of the shareholders as their agent, and it must act in the interests of the corporation to ensure
the survival of the firm, safeguarding the long-term stakes of each group.
Also, according to H. Jeff Smith stakeholder theory asserts that managers have a duty to both the
corporations shareholder and individuals and constituencies that contribute, either voluntarily or
involuntarily, to [a companys] wealth-creating capacity and activities, and who are therefore its potential
beneficiaries and/or risk bearers. Managers are agents of all stakeholders and have two responsibilities:
to ensure that the ethical rights of no stakeholder are violated and to balance the legitimate interests of
the stakeholders when making decisions. The objective is to balance profit maximization with the longterm ability of the corporation to remain a going concern.
From the above views of the shareholder and stakeholder theory, I support the ideal shareholder wealth
maximization should be a superior objective over stakeholder interest because as follows:
As we know, from a modern financial perspective a firms main objective is to maximize its shareholder
wealth. The wealth is shown via the market by the price of companys common stock, which is a reflection
http://www.lawteacher.net/business-law/essays/shareholder-wealth-maximization-la... 21-Nov-2014
of the 3 key variables: timing of cash flows, magnitude of cash flows and the risk of the cash flows that
Home
Services
Quote / Order Now
investors expect a firm to generate over time.
Page 2 of 3
Quality
Law Help
About Us
Normally, profit maximization after tax (ETA) is considered as the main purpose of the firm, but it is not
regarded as a objective to maximize shareholder wealth because earnings per share (EPS) will be more
important than total profits. A company can increase its total profits by making an issue of stocks and
using the returns to invest in other bonds for profits. Even maximizing profit per share, but, is not a
completely suitable goal, firstly because it does not show the time factor or period of expected interest.
Secondly, next mistake of maximizing EPS is that it does not take interest in the risk or uncertainty of the
future return flow. So, there are several investment projects will more risky than others. Consequently, the
prospective flow of EPS would not be more ensured if these projects were undertaken. Besides, a firm
will be more or less risky to be conditional on the total of debt relevant to equity in its capital
structure. This risk is considered as financial risk and it contributes to the uncertainty of the future flow of
earnings per share too. For instance, there are two companies A and B with the same of the expected
future EPS. However, the earnings flow of the company A depends significantly more uncertainty than the
earnings flow of the company B, so the market price per share of the company As stock may be lower.
For the mentioned-above reasons, a maximization objective of EPS may not be the same as those
maximizing market price per share. The value of a companys stock in the market shows the focal
judgment of overall market participants with what the value is of the specific business. It mentions to
present and prospective EPS, the timing, duration, and risk of these returns, and any other factors
relating to market price of stock. The market price is regarded as a performance index of firms progress
and this let us know that how well management is running in behalf of its stockholders.
In some circumstances the management goals perhaps differ from those of the firm stockholders. In a
corporation (especially it goes stock market) whose stock is extensively held, stockholders give a bit of
their control or influence over the company operations. When the company control is segregated from its
ownership, management does not completely try their best to do jobs for the best benefits of the
stockholders. They perhaps feel satisfied to run and seek a growth level accepted and concerned a lot
with maintaining their own existence than with firms value maximization to its shareholders. The top
important purpose to this management may be its own survival. Consequently, this leads to unwilling to
face with reasonable risks for their fear of making a mistake, hence becoming easily seen to the suppliers
of capital from outside. Then, these suppliers may give out a threat to managements existence. To exist
over a long time, management has to know to behave by a way that is reasonably suitable with
maximization of shareholder value. However, the objectives of the parties are not always necessary the
same. Maximizing shareholder value, subsequently, is a consistent example for how a
firm should act. When management does not follow these guides, we must recognize this as a restriction
and make decision for the opportunity cost. This cost is measurable only if we decide what the result
would be had the firm attempted to maximize value to shareholder.
The purpose of capital markets is to effectively apportion savings in an economy from last savers to last
users of capital who invest in real properties. If savings are interested in the top auspicious investment
chances, a reasonable economic criteria must exist that manages their flows. In general, the savings
allocation in an economy happens on the foundation of expected earnings and risk. The value of a
businesss stock in the market is both of these factors. Accordingly, it reflects the markets equilibration
process between returns and risk. If making decisions in accordance with the probably effect upon the
market value of its stock, a business will only be able to attract capital from outside when its investment
chances defend the use of that capital in the whole economy.
However, this does not mean management will not mention to social responsibility and stakeholders
interests. Namely, Social responsibility of a firm towards shareholders is to ensure good return on
investment, towards employees is fair pay and working conditions, towards suppliers is prompt payment
and fair procurement process, towards customers is fair price, safe product and after sales service and
towards local community is providing jobs and supporting the community development activities,
supporting education, and becoming actively involved in environmental issues like clean air and water.
Hence, the stakeholders interest is the interest of stakeholders said above. The stakeholder interests
sometimes conflict or influence with the shareholders interests in maximizing wealth. Furthermore, the
criteria for social responsibility and stakeholders interests are not clearly specified, making formulation of
an appropriate goal function difficult. Therefore, manager has to know to coordinate between the
shareholder wealth maximization and its stakeholder interests with superior financial results.
In conclusion, maximizing shareholder wealth is a superior objective which a business firm must
obligatorily fulfill to survive. If firms do not operate with the goal of shareholder wealth maximization in
mind, shareholders will have little incentive to accept the risk necessary for a business to thrive. However,
this maximization of wealth is not understood to be at all costs. It will be a contented combination
between shareholder and stakeholder interests with best financial results. Depending on each specific
situation, each specific circumstance and each specific condition of firms, they can sort out what is the
best solution for their organization.
Page 3 of 3
Home
Services
Quote / Order Now
Quality
Law Help
About Us
How do you rate the quality of the essay above?
Good
Neutral
Poor
Request the removal of this law essay
Place an Order / Get a Quote
Join us on your favourite social network
Copyright 2003 - 2014 - Law Teacher is a trading name of All Answers Ltd. All Answers Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales. Company Registration
No: 4964706. VAT Registration No: 842417633. Registered Data Controller No: Z1821391. Registered office: Venture House, Cross Street, Arnold, Nottingham,
Nottinghamshire, NG5 7PJ. Law Teacher - The law essay professionals
Homepage
Services
Fair use policy
About Us
|
Contact Us
Terms & conditions
OSCOLA Generator
Privacy policy
Law Essay Help
Compliants policy
Writing Guides
Cookie Info
Account Login
Writing jobs

Shareholder Wealth Maximization

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Shareholder Wealth Maximization

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Shareholder Wealth Maximization

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

shareholder wealth maximization | Law Teacher

Quote / Order Now

Need help? 0115 966 7966