----- Original Message ----- From: "Devine, James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 3:27 PM Subject: [PEN-L:21610] RE: Re: Krugman.........faux Schumpeterian
>In Doug's book there's "[m]anagers, Jensen and Meckling argued, would manage in the interest of the outside claimants if they held bigger stakes in the companies. Executives debt and stock holdings should be evenly balanced, to assure they never try to reward or screw one class of holders at the expense of others. [287] >Doesn't Enron discredit the whole Jensen-Meckling-Monks approach to shareholder control of the board if that approach thinks the best set of incentives to give the board is to allow them to own shares and thereby align themselves with the interests of outside shareholders? Isn't that just asking for asymmetric information problems bigtime!? What forms of ownership-governance would reduce the asymmetries of information witholding/diffusion both intra-firm and the larger community?< yeah, Jensen _et al_ should be totally discredited at this point (but probably aren't). The whole thing fits with the title of one of Michael Perelman's books, THE NATURAL INSTABILITY OF MARKETS. JD ============= Well what was Rob Schaap's suggestion a while back for the *experts* on this list [lurkers and non-lurkers alike] making a stink by talking to journalists and even, gulp, calling Congress and talking to staffer's etc.? Let's saddle up the damn horse! :-) Ian
