And by default hold decision making positions in those companies.
It's not hard to work out bro, like I said the other day it's air bnb/uber on steroids.
Election 2024
- Thread starter brb
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
It's not hard to work out bro, like I said the other day it's air bnb/uber on steroids.
They have an influence through their index voting, but they don't have decision making positions.
In the instances where they have voted, 93% of the time they just defer it to the management positions in those companies.
Check out the vid bro. Just for balance of opinion
CbaThey have an influence through their index voting, but they don't have decision making positions.
In the instances where they have voted, 93% of the time they just defer it to the management positions in those companies.
Check out the vid bro. Just for balance of opinion
Doubt the first bit - that would be a 'conflict of interest' and company law also contains the concept of 'fiduciary duty' (in particular for Directors) that is there to ensure integrity for those in such positions...
The video I posted talks about Blackrock's fiduciary duty to their investors at 13:05
Yeah ... but Jason on X said ... and Jason should know ... he's an influencer with millions of followers on his Minecraft podcast ... innit...
There's an interesting article here about Labour's relationship with Blackrock.
I know loads of conspiracy theorists are citing this as further evidence of Blackrock controlling our Govts, but when you break it down you understand that it is about the UK Govt encouraging big investment into British infrastructure, and thus in turn they hope that will boost the Economy and job security etc. This isn't really a secret, Labour have said that they want to secure investment into the UK and so it makes sense to get the world's biggest investment company around the table.
The interesting part in here is though, that whilst Blackrock are an asset manager, and only hold shares (for their investors) in around 5% of any given company. They have started to acquire infrastructure companies 'In January this year, the firm announced it would purchase Global Infrastructure Partners, which controls around $170bn worth of assets worldwide, including Gatwick airport and Hornsea 1, a project to build the world’s largest offshore windfarm in the North Sea. This purchase, which was completed last month, reportedly makes BlackRock the second largest asset manager in the infrastructure space, after ‘the vampire kangaroo’, Macquarie.
Critics will argue that when asset managers own significant chunks of infrastructure, their priority is their investors (including sovereign wealth funds and pension funds), rather than society, or even the planet. The primary purpose of infrastructure, the argument goes, becomes the generation of profit, rather than providing a working, reliable service. In practice this might mean cutting investment while raising prices'
So in effect what Labour are doing is something akin to PFI on steroids. Using private finance to rebuild Britain's infrastructure. Is that the right thing to do ? Nobody wants to pay more taxes, and to finance massive infrastructure projects you need massive investment. I know some commentators criticise Blackrock for their ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) for being 'woke' but as investors they would naturally want to make sure that those investments are in companies who have rigorous safeguards in place, rather than some cowboy outfits who are simply out to make money, but have little regard for any social or environmental impact, as they represent a bigger risk for investors
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/da...ock-letters-inside-labours-close-partnership/
I know loads of conspiracy theorists are citing this as further evidence of Blackrock controlling our Govts, but when you break it down you understand that it is about the UK Govt encouraging big investment into British infrastructure, and thus in turn they hope that will boost the Economy and job security etc. This isn't really a secret, Labour have said that they want to secure investment into the UK and so it makes sense to get the world's biggest investment company around the table.
The interesting part in here is though, that whilst Blackrock are an asset manager, and only hold shares (for their investors) in around 5% of any given company. They have started to acquire infrastructure companies 'In January this year, the firm announced it would purchase Global Infrastructure Partners, which controls around $170bn worth of assets worldwide, including Gatwick airport and Hornsea 1, a project to build the world’s largest offshore windfarm in the North Sea. This purchase, which was completed last month, reportedly makes BlackRock the second largest asset manager in the infrastructure space, after ‘the vampire kangaroo’, Macquarie.
Critics will argue that when asset managers own significant chunks of infrastructure, their priority is their investors (including sovereign wealth funds and pension funds), rather than society, or even the planet. The primary purpose of infrastructure, the argument goes, becomes the generation of profit, rather than providing a working, reliable service. In practice this might mean cutting investment while raising prices'
So in effect what Labour are doing is something akin to PFI on steroids. Using private finance to rebuild Britain's infrastructure. Is that the right thing to do ? Nobody wants to pay more taxes, and to finance massive infrastructure projects you need massive investment. I know some commentators criticise Blackrock for their ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) for being 'woke' but as investors they would naturally want to make sure that those investments are in companies who have rigorous safeguards in place, rather than some cowboy outfits who are simply out to make money, but have little regard for any social or environmental impact, as they represent a bigger risk for investors
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/da...ock-letters-inside-labours-close-partnership/
I didn’t read the post but it didn’t sound like it was going to be very interesting if I’d read on.
Think most on here switch off if the words 'interesting article' are present in the opening
There's a decent 17 min video here that breaks down what Blackrock do and how they operate.
Well worth a watch, because there's a lot of noise out there about what people think they do.
You must log in or register to see media
Lol I've not once even alluded to wild theories about Blackrock, my humour comes from you defending wealth, which is what you are doing and even putting up videos to justify it. I just find your hypocrisy funny, so what happened to this taxing the rich and helping the little man narratives. At least I know now Blackrock are the good guys, OK.
lol
Think most on here switch off if the words 'interesting article' are present in the opening
It’s dry af lol and very boring
which is kind of the point really. Blackrock aren’t these evil overlords of Govt that some wish to believe they are. They are just asset managers for their investors
Dont be stupid. They are going to work with gates, starve us all and inject us with nano bots so we can be the slaves who build all their machines before we are culled to 1.5m people globally and they pocket all the money