Talk:Dodge v. Ford Motor Co.
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Untitled
editDodge v. Ford Motor Company is frequently cited as support for the idea that "corporate law requires boards of directors to maximize shareholder wealth." I've added a section that discusses that interpretation. Please feel free to add other links that take either side. --Vrmlguy (talk) 14:51, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
You're missing an important piece of the facts...the Dodge brothers were early investors in Ford Motors who had through extraordinary dividends reaped more (far more actually) than a 100% return on their investment and were getting a 5% MONTHLY regular dividend... Maczenwes (talk) 09:09, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
- This alludes to an answer to the question I just posted in the "Discussion Pages" here. If true, and/or whatever the truth is ("reliable sources", etc...), it should be detailed in the Article.107.195.106.201 (talk) 22:30, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Removal of significance section
editI've just reverted the wholesale removal by an anonymous editor of the entire "significance" section. I suspect an agenda is at play here -- this case is often cited by anti-corporate propagandists as establishing a strict requirement on companies to maximize profits, which the significance section showed quite clearly to be at best a controversial interpretation of the case. Might be worth some more regular wikipedia editors keeping an eye on this page for potential vandalism/agenda-pushing? 212.159.69.4 (talk) 10:01, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
How Did Dodge Achieve Standing?
editThe Article doesn't mention this, and I think it's a critical fact. If for example, Dodge were somehow shareholders, I could see how they had standing, but it appears to me that Dodge was a competitor, and had no legal standing to file suit in the first place. I just read about this case for the first time ever, and it's very interesting to me, but there's a big void in the Article on this question, IMO.107.195.106.201 (talk) 22:28, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
corpgov.law.harvard.edu
editCame across this, maybe useful.
https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2021/12/01/dodge-v-ford-what-happened-and-why/
2601:644:8501:AAF0:0:0:0:6375 (talk) 23:45, 27 November 2023 (UTC)