[ad_1]
He is the man with full powers. At 34, Mark Zuckerberg is both co-founder, CEO and chairman of Facebook's board, which has become the largest social network in the world. Launched in 2004 as a simple student trombinoscope, the platform is now used by over 2 billion Internet users. A dazzling success, accompanied by the excesses that we know: spread of fake news (fa usses viral news popularized during the Brexit in 2016), dissemination of political propaganda … scandal to date: the Cambridge Analytica affair, which broke out in mid-March. Facebook is accused of letting go of the personal data of 87 million users for the benefit of Cambridge Analytica. This research firm used them for political purposes, in favor of Donald Trump during the US presidential election and the "Leave.EU" group at Brexit in 2016.
While the pans – and the excuses Mark Zuckerberg – accumulate, some shareholders have wondered for several months: is it too much responsibility for one and the same man? If the question has dragged on for more than a year, worries have grown since Cambridge Analytica. According to a Business Insider survey released last week, "83% of independent investors – those shareholders who are neither Mark Zuckerberg himself nor his relatives – believe he should be fired from the board of directors" [19459004
"I think that the chairman of the board should be independent" increased in early April on CNBC Scott Stringer. As a New York City Controller, he oversees a pension fund that has invested about $ 1 billion in Facebook. "We need more directors and independent directors, who have experience in data, ethics and everything that these large emerging companies need."
Record Exchange … and "moral bankruptcy"
At the general meeting of shareholders in early June, investor James McCritchie warned against a drift "corporate dictatorship" . According to the American press, an investor was even expelled from the room for shouting that "shareholder democracy is lacking in Facebook" .
However, the social network has never been so good from a financial point of view. The share price has exploded, from $ 38.23 during its IPO in May 2012 to over $ 200 in June. A historic record, and this, despite all the polemics. Same story on the turnover side. In the first half of 2018, the social network recorded an astonishing turnover of 12 billion dollars (+ 49% over one year) and a net profit of 5 billion dollars (+ 63% on a
"When there is a disagreement with the board of directors, the motivation of the shareholders is not only financial, but some people may also worry about" moral bankruptcy "in the future, taking ethical criteria, "explains Claudine Mangen, associate professor at Concordia University in Montreal, in charge of a research chair in responsible organizations, and specialized in the governance of
And continue: "When a tool like Facebook, used by more than 2 billion users worldwide, becomes a privileged access to information to the point of being able to weigh in an electoral process [Facebook est accusé d’avoir servi de plateforme de manipulation pendant l’élection présidentielle américaine, Ndlr] It is normal for shareholders They want to go towards an awareness. "
| See also: Facebook is richer than ever despite the scandal Cambridge Analytica
Concentration of voting rights
At Facebook, share-sharing is at the heart of the rumble. Two types of shares are available: those of type A, allowing to obtain a voting right per share, intended for independent investors. And those of type B, to obtain the equivalent of 10 voting rights. According to Business Insider these are held by a very closed circle of about ten people, led by Mark Zuckerberg and his relatives, like Sheryl Sandberg, number two Facebook and board member. Consequence: the young billionaire holds 60% of the voting rights. What he wants, he gets it.
"To remove a board member, you need 50% of the votes, so much so that as long as Mark Zuckerberg has so much power, he will continue to vote in his own right. favor and therefore, it can not be ejected " ensures Claudine Mangen
Besides the cases of forced departures can be counted on the fingers of a hand, or almost. "It is extremely rare for CEOs to leave the board of directors of their companies, there was the case of Travis Kalanick [fondateur de l’application Uber, il a démissionné en 2017 suite à des scandales de harcèlements sexuels dans l’entreprise, Ndlr]but he had much less power – about 20% of vote at the time " emphasizes Claudine Mangen
The only solution would be that Mark Zuckerberg himself decides to abdicate. "Let's say that Facebook's financial situation is degenerating and that shareholder pressure is increasing, so Mark Zuckerberg could decide to give up his shares" to save the company, anticipates Claudine Mangen. This is what Bill Gates did in 2000. The founder of Microsoft had abandoned his title of CEO of the computer group to keep the head of the board. It remains to be seen if the founder of Facebook will follow the example of the one he considers his mentor.
[ad_2]
Source link
