Some deviant thoughts on minority shareholder rights

Just thinking out loud..

This October will be the 12th year that I've run a C-class corporation.  That means stockholders and what not.  As a result, I have long been familiar with the rights and priviledges of stock holders, even minority ones.

In 12 years of business, I don't think anyone could find a single disgruntled business partner.  That is, in 12 years, no one we've worked with has ever expressed any dissatisfaction with how they were treated. So even though we're "evil capitalists" I think we've tried to be ethical, evil, capitalists.

But what if we started firing people left and right who owned stock? Maybe our reasons were legitimate. But what woudl the rights of the minority shareholder be?

Unlike public corporations, private corporations (closely held corporations) do have to tip toe a bit on how they treat their shareholders. The majority shareholders have to treat minority holders "fairly", "honestly", and "openly".  It is called the "fiduciary" duty.  Officers, board of directors, are even more liable -- legally -- to treat minority holders fairly.

The courts have ruled already on what happens to private corporations who violate these rules.  The relief has included:

· Dissolution of the corporation;

· Ordering a buy-out of the minority shares;

· Appointment of a provisional director, custodian or receiver;

· Rescinding corporate acts unfair to the minority;

· Awarding damages to minority shareholders.

Many private corporations have discovered that they cannot just walk over minority holders. Having 51% control of a company, for instance, doesn't give you the ability to go hog-wild.  As distasteful as it often is for majority shareholders, major corporate decisions have to be documented, minutes included from meetings, with minority share holders.  I couldn't, for instance, simply terminate a significant shareholder of the company without a formalized vote and ample documentation (heck, I can't even fire employees without ample documentation).

The best route to take with shareholders is to just set your company up with a formalized ethical business practices.  Individual actions, even ones that the officers feel are perfectly just and right, can be interpreted to be unethical and judged illegal. That is why openness with shareholders is key.  Document. Document. Document.  And openness between shareholders.

26,625 views 13 replies
Reply #1 Top
I couldn't, for instance, simply terminate a significant shareholder of the company without a formalized vote and ample documentation (heck, I can't even fire employees without ample documentation).


That's a devious thought...most definately...
Reply #2 Top

I thought this was going to be about your friends over at Deviat Art.

Perhaps I am not wrong?  If anything, the testimony of Karmagirl seems to indicate you have nothing to worry about.

I worked for a company like that!  I sure miss them (they withdrew from my market).  Any plans to expand to Virginia?

Reply #3 Top

thought this was going to be about your friends over at Deviat Art.

I think the word 'deviant' is a clue....

Reply #4 Top
just a little left handed slap.
Reply #5 Top
LOL

I see no clues here! Its just a deviant thought about corporations and firing miniroty share holders... its just ironic that Devaint Art also seems to fire shareholders...
Reply #6 Top
See this is one of the reasons I like Stardock and you sooo much

Posted via WinCustomize Browser/Stardock Central
Reply #7 Top
Hi Brad,

I'm actually having the issues you brought up in your original post and was wondering if you could give me more information as to your sources on the courts etc.

Family businesses!

Alan
Reply #8 Top
....and..... 32 months later......;)
Reply #9 Top
Wow.  Resurrection post.
Still could be an interesting (new and improved discussion).
Reply #10 Top
I wonder how many have been fired since.  ;p 
Reply #11 Top
I ran across the post a while back and thought it was interesting. Would love to hear any suggestions on how to handle the exact situation that Brad wrote about in the beginning. I have been harassed, denied financial information (for a year) etc etc. Have been told that since the corporation is privately owned therre is no obligation to give financial information to the shareholder. (lol) Ran the company for 15 years and was removed without cause. Own 21%, father 40% and Chinese partner, 39%. Of course in the Chinese culture the parent is always right no matter what so they are supporting the parent.

Currently, have gotten counsel and am threatening a derivitates suit against the corporation. But I don't feel that the corporation is working my best interest and would like to see how there could be a remedy of a forced buyout etc.

So any suggestions? Especially for Missouri?
Reply #12 Top
Probably emailing Brad or PM'ing him would be best. :)