Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

seakingsoyuz t1_izexa4i wrote

FYI the US government only bought 61% of the company; the rest was held by the governments of Canada and Ontario, the unions (UAW and CAW), and GM’s former bondholders.


lawschoolquestion34 t1_izeze38 wrote

Typically anything over 50% is considered “ownership” given the control that often comes with such a big chunk of a company.


finite2 t1_izfl54r wrote

That's not really true anymore in corporate America though is it? Shares with 10x voting rights, share with no voting rights etc...


lawschoolquestion34 t1_izfqmjc wrote

Those rights aren’t typical for the Fortune 500. Usually found in public former startups like Facebook with powerful founders or investors-turned-owners. Certain rights associated with preferred stock etc. certainly exists but what you’ll see with voting power at Facebook is far and away the exception to the rule.


drunkenviking t1_izf1bkz wrote

Sure, but the US government had enough ownership power to make any decisions unilaterally. The other players owned a chunk but were essentially toothless.


spongesking t1_izg7mmp wrote

Not true. Stocks are divided into preferred and common stocks. The difference is that preferred stocks don't have voting rights; common stocks do.

I know the US government bought preferred stocks, but don't know how much. So, this could imply the US government wasn't the "true main shareholders".


drunkenviking t1_izgs0fu wrote

I assumed that the other person knew more than I did, hence the response I gave. (Which was probably dumb of me!)


spongesking t1_izh2i3b wrote

No problem, just clarifying, because usually reality is more complex.