This honestly makes me want to apply to roles there. Incredible.
The family still get 100% voting power. And the move is just a way to avoid taxe for the children while they still control the company. And it Seems that the charity (owned by the oligarch family), is still able to use fund to campaign, and corrupt (sorry influence) the elected officials
Me too, especially with a reputed news outlet like the washington post tittle is :"Billionaire smacks back at capitalism" And other lament, that the poor Billionaire had to pay 17 millions, just to gift Earth all his fortunewhen Patagonia announced the move, I naïvely took it at face value.
I was discussing Patagonia with a friend just yesterday, and pointing out that the shareholder capitalism of Milton Friedman that seemed so obvious in the '80s has been made lie in no small part by Patagonia and other companies that have followed their lead. I read David Gelles' The Man Who Broke Capitalism last month. He starts out his book by pointing out that "stakeholder capitalism" wasn't invented at the World Economic Forum last week (as Klaus Schwab would have you believe but that it was the prevailing market sentiment prior to Herbert Hoover and the rise of fascism in Europe. I've come around to the idea that "shareholder capitalism" is just a clever way to externalize everything that doesn't make you money, and "stakeholder capitalism" is just a clever way to ensure you pay the proper taxes on your enterprise. I think there will be laws passed - and soon - that provide incentives for Patagonia's method of business and penalize Jack Welch's. ("The Man Who Broke Capitalism" dunks so hard on AB InBev)