Professor, reference to the Slide no66, The Modified Objective function, just wanted to ensure my understanding is right. Slides referring about increasing stock price, or increasing stock holder wealth are indicators of increasing firm value. But we refer the firm value is about adhering to 3 principles with due-diligence aka Investment decision, finance decision and dividend decision which indirectly [may or highly likely] result into increasing stock price or stock holder wealth. so, if I listened to your class right, value of the firm is about keeping the principles/ fundamentals intact which in turn yield the quantitative benefits. so, shouldn't I say, these quantitative results (stock price, stock holder benefits) are the litmus test to following the fundamentals/3 principles right (keeping market sentiments/ shortsightedness of market reactions aside)?
Professor, regarding the Mission statement (slide 65), you were referring to Mission statement being focused. While it needs to be focused, it should also be long lasting for the company to thrive on mission statement through continuous learning and innovation. For example, Constructing X no. of houses for homeless may not be an effective mission statement as the completion of X could be within a definitive time frame. What will that NGO do after achieving this? Either they change the mission statement or shut the undertaking and return the money to shareholders. Just my 2 cents.
Professor, reference to the Slide no66, The Modified Objective function, just wanted to ensure my understanding is right. Slides referring about increasing stock price, or increasing stock holder wealth are indicators of increasing firm value. But we refer the firm value is about adhering to 3 principles with due-diligence aka Investment decision, finance decision and dividend decision which indirectly [may or highly likely] result into increasing stock price or stock holder wealth. so, if I listened to your class right, value of the firm is about keeping the principles/ fundamentals intact which in turn yield the quantitative benefits. so, shouldn't I say, these quantitative results (stock price, stock holder benefits) are the litmus test to following the fundamentals/3 principles right (keeping market sentiments/ shortsightedness of market reactions aside)?
Thanks for uploading.
Professor, regarding the Mission statement (slide 65), you were referring to Mission statement being focused. While it needs to be focused, it should also be long lasting for the company to thrive on mission statement through continuous learning and innovation. For example, Constructing X no. of houses for homeless may not be an effective mission statement as the completion of X could be within a definitive time frame. What will that NGO do after achieving this? Either they change the mission statement or shut the undertaking and return the money to shareholders. Just my 2 cents.