MovieChat Forums > Wall Street (1987) Discussion > Screw the Shareholders to Save the Compa...

Screw the Shareholders to Save the Company?

posted 12 years ago by Withrow68
8 replies | jump to latest

Bud Fox took Bluestar out of Gekko's hands when he would have paid $20 to $23 per share and forced them to take Wildman's offer at $18 per share. He permanently wiped out $2 to $5 per share in market value just to "save" the company.

Was the message of Wall Street that it's okay to screw the shareholders over as long as you are doing it to save the company and jobs, even if the company is a half-ass company with half ass management, that it's still worth saving? Isn't that how Fox described Bluestar to Gekko?

I mean, maybe Gekko was right. Maybe it was too risky to try and turn Bluestar around if he could cash out for a quick $75 million profit.

[–] firstwinsgop 12 years ago

It depends on whether you view Gekko as the hero or not. As many people, including myself, certainly do view Gekko as the hero, I don't think you can characterize the film's view that way at all.

Teldar Paper was being run for the benefit of the Executives. Bluestar was being run as a cash cow for the Union. Both outfits were essentially criminal in nature, and displayed the same kind of crony capitalist mindset that led to the recent financial crisis. Gekko was against all that. He stood for the people that actually owned the company and against the Corporate Fat Cats and Union Thugs.

[–] snagletooth 11 years ago

"Bluestar was being run as a cash cow for the Union. Both outfits were essentially criminal in nature, and displayed the same kind of crony capitalist mindset that led to the recent financial crisis."

LOL. Employing people is criminal?

Let's see you find the law cite for that one. Fiduciary responsibility doesn't mean you screw over all other parties.

Thinking it does is what has driven the short-term sham profits corporate governance mind set that actually was what caused the financial crisis, you asswipe of a fool.

[–] fourpointstars 11 years ago

Being paid $40 an hour, even when you don't work for three months certainly is! Fox's selfish and hypocritical actions cost the shareholders millions. On top of that, what Fox did was stock manipulation, which is illegal.

[–] snagletooth 11 years ago

What is the 40 dollars an hour for not working for three months about?

Bud Fox is an ass, at least until he realizes his idol is going to trash the company.

Gekko is an even bigger ass. Gekko profited from insider information, stock manipulation, etc. on an order of magnitude greater scale than Bud did, and Bud supposedly gave back his earnings. Gekko lied about nearly every intention he had, except making money. He wasn't satisfied to try to the airline on a solvent but not particularly profitable basis and then get out, he wanted to dismantle it and take advantage of what was legal thievery then, like scooping up the overfunded pension plan. Absolutely dispicable. Too bad he probably spent time in a Club Fed instead of some hellhole where he'd have been raped a dozen times a day.

Wildman took over the company and wanted to run it profitably and was willing to sign a no-break-up deal. As far as we know the company may have gone on to make millions for the shareholders without screwing the employees and venders.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] johnston.scot 12 years ago

Regarding Bluestar:

I think we were supposed to assume, blithely, that with Bud's brilliant plan in place, the company would perform sufficiently well that the shareholders would wind up better off than if they'd foolishly sold to Gekko. That, or some similar fairy tale.

It's kind of an odd mythos to be adopted by a director who's supposedly all about exposing the hypcrisy of the establishment, but whatever....

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]