D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
Anyone got any opinions or tech info on these boats?
<hr width=100% size=1>
<hr width=100% size=1>
Renegade_Master
Well-Known Member
from 48ft to 145ft.... gosh Mike you must be doin well/forums/images/icons/smile.gif
<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.suncoastmarine.co.uk>Sun Coast Sea School & Charter</A>
<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.suncoastmarine.co.uk>Sun Coast Sea School & Charter</A>
D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
Unfortunately not, Clive, 145 means 14.5m
<hr width=100% size=1>
<hr width=100% size=1>
tcm
...
some of these in lanapoule. They seem soundly built, though not handsome.
<hr width=100% size=1>
<hr width=100% size=1>
D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
Yes, there's been one parked next to us for the whole season and SWMBO has declared that she wants one rather than any rubbish Brit boats but then she's always gone for size rather than quality. We looked over one that Bart's got for sale and I have to say they do seem to be solidy built and feel much roomier inside and out than an equivalent Brit boat. I would say classically styled rather than not handsome
<hr width=100% size=1>
<hr width=100% size=1>
tcm
...
The squareness is partly the secret of maximum utilisation of space- the curves in brit boats rob loads and loads of space, making it impossible to get or use the internal space. The brits alse seem too keen on massive internal mouldings to make the fitout a simple matter of boshing on the cushions.
Also i think some of the brit designers may be midgets. The ferretti at LIBS showed just how much space there could be on 70 (?) footer whereas equivalent length britboats are too compact - everything seems sacrificed for the style whereas the eyeties seem to be disinterested in compromising the function. I still can't get over the way the eyeties whammed in a load of Miele cookers etc, must've cost double the amount that brit builders use to get away with cheap gear - and the same applies to the poncy end of brit sailboats too.
The ferrettis and other eyeties boats are also very good at a "storable" boat - they know that the boat is unused at least 6 months of the year so on many (dunno about all the specific models) you can store away all the cushions, and off course the cushions are low-tech enough that you can get nice covers made for them - compare against brits where the main function is to get a spectucular glaring gleam off the arclights in a boat show - hence thin bright white glued-on cushions are the norm on britboats all the way up to 80 feet and above. Oh, and ferreti (the 72 anyway) know how to make a splooshy comfy sofa - brits makem far too hard qv squaddie58
Most noticeable of all is the shiplike nature of eyeties against equivalent length brits. Even above 60 foot brits stuff seems still on a large speedboat scale - compare princess 60+ against ferretti and the brits look a bit feeble.
Against this the brit boats (some of them anyway) seem quieter and swifter - possible a function of using more mouldings than wood, but also a function of fitting the smallest amount of cheapy kit that they can get away with rather than the best that money can buy. Yet when brtits do pull out the stops -they often end up with daft features such as teak sidedecks which "look nice" but make feet boil and look manky very soon, wooden surfaces in galleys (princess and sunseeker) and highgloss veneer wooden kitchen cabinets (all of them) which look sexy at boatshow but aint as practical as the ferretti etc. qv that ferretti at LIBS which looked near-new even though the boat had done 600 hours on charter.
I believe the MBC boat engineering task force remains ready and willing to attend any UK boat factory to help them out for reasonable fee plus expenses, but many others have tried to help them and failed - they are outsiders and/or didn't get a 2.2 from Lanchester poly. Compare with eyeties where shipbuilders pass skills from one generation to the next and they even take work home to work out a problem. A secondhand ferretti would be a god idea i think, would be fixable, and renewable over time. But it would be a bit yellowish (but easier on the eye in bright sunlight) and not-swoopy/curvy (though a 50 footer wd have more spce init that equiv 60 foot brit boat and the bogs would be human sized whereas sseeker predator 74 is only roomy if you a rich midget like branson or ecclestone.
<hr width=100% size=1>
Also i think some of the brit designers may be midgets. The ferretti at LIBS showed just how much space there could be on 70 (?) footer whereas equivalent length britboats are too compact - everything seems sacrificed for the style whereas the eyeties seem to be disinterested in compromising the function. I still can't get over the way the eyeties whammed in a load of Miele cookers etc, must've cost double the amount that brit builders use to get away with cheap gear - and the same applies to the poncy end of brit sailboats too.
The ferrettis and other eyeties boats are also very good at a "storable" boat - they know that the boat is unused at least 6 months of the year so on many (dunno about all the specific models) you can store away all the cushions, and off course the cushions are low-tech enough that you can get nice covers made for them - compare against brits where the main function is to get a spectucular glaring gleam off the arclights in a boat show - hence thin bright white glued-on cushions are the norm on britboats all the way up to 80 feet and above. Oh, and ferreti (the 72 anyway) know how to make a splooshy comfy sofa - brits makem far too hard qv squaddie58
Most noticeable of all is the shiplike nature of eyeties against equivalent length brits. Even above 60 foot brits stuff seems still on a large speedboat scale - compare princess 60+ against ferretti and the brits look a bit feeble.
Against this the brit boats (some of them anyway) seem quieter and swifter - possible a function of using more mouldings than wood, but also a function of fitting the smallest amount of cheapy kit that they can get away with rather than the best that money can buy. Yet when brtits do pull out the stops -they often end up with daft features such as teak sidedecks which "look nice" but make feet boil and look manky very soon, wooden surfaces in galleys (princess and sunseeker) and highgloss veneer wooden kitchen cabinets (all of them) which look sexy at boatshow but aint as practical as the ferretti etc. qv that ferretti at LIBS which looked near-new even though the boat had done 600 hours on charter.
I believe the MBC boat engineering task force remains ready and willing to attend any UK boat factory to help them out for reasonable fee plus expenses, but many others have tried to help them and failed - they are outsiders and/or didn't get a 2.2 from Lanchester poly. Compare with eyeties where shipbuilders pass skills from one generation to the next and they even take work home to work out a problem. A secondhand ferretti would be a god idea i think, would be fixable, and renewable over time. But it would be a bit yellowish (but easier on the eye in bright sunlight) and not-swoopy/curvy (though a 50 footer wd have more spce init that equiv 60 foot brit boat and the bogs would be human sized whereas sseeker predator 74 is only roomy if you a rich midget like branson or ecclestone.
<hr width=100% size=1>
D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
I think you've hit the nail on the head there. The Brit builders have a bottom up approach in that they've been building ever larger boats but the quality is not demonstrably different from the smaller models they started off with but the eyeties have mostly been building large motor yachts for years and the quality filters down to their smaller models. Its the old adage; better buy a cheap Merc than an expensive Ford
Personally, I have always liked the off white gelcoat colour used by the likes of Ferretti and Riva. It looks classier than the brilliant white Dulux look of most other boats and it probably wears better as well. Styling is a matter of taste and I dont find the squarer Italian styling unattractive but I'm sure it does'nt catch the eye at a boat show like the starship styling of a Sunseeker for example. The trouble with style statements is that they're in fashion one year and completely non-u the next.
Your comments on 'storeability' are also right. On our Targa 48 and I see it's the same on the new Phantom 46, in the master cabin Fairline give you 2 narrow hanging lockers and 2 under bed drawers, one of which is deleted if you have aircon. How on earth you're supposed to store 2 weeks worth of clothing only the designers know. On the Ferretti, we counted 14 different lockers in the master cabin alone; you could stay on board for months
Then there's the galley. The fixtures are mostly domestic size and of good quality. I looked at a Predator at LIBS with a price tag north of £1m and the galley worktop was wood, not Corian and the fridge and hob would'nt have looked out of place in £15k caravan
Finally, there's the cachet of the Ferretti name. Sounds like Ferrari does'nt it? Certainly going to sound better when you're chatting up the barmaid at the local pub
<hr width=100% size=1>
Personally, I have always liked the off white gelcoat colour used by the likes of Ferretti and Riva. It looks classier than the brilliant white Dulux look of most other boats and it probably wears better as well. Styling is a matter of taste and I dont find the squarer Italian styling unattractive but I'm sure it does'nt catch the eye at a boat show like the starship styling of a Sunseeker for example. The trouble with style statements is that they're in fashion one year and completely non-u the next.
Your comments on 'storeability' are also right. On our Targa 48 and I see it's the same on the new Phantom 46, in the master cabin Fairline give you 2 narrow hanging lockers and 2 under bed drawers, one of which is deleted if you have aircon. How on earth you're supposed to store 2 weeks worth of clothing only the designers know. On the Ferretti, we counted 14 different lockers in the master cabin alone; you could stay on board for months
Then there's the galley. The fixtures are mostly domestic size and of good quality. I looked at a Predator at LIBS with a price tag north of £1m and the galley worktop was wood, not Corian and the fridge and hob would'nt have looked out of place in £15k caravan
Finally, there's the cachet of the Ferretti name. Sounds like Ferrari does'nt it? Certainly going to sound better when you're chatting up the barmaid at the local pub
<hr width=100% size=1>
adarcy
Well-Known Member
All agreed as long as you can drive the d*mned thing
viz current MBY on how the Ferretti 50 continues the honoured tradition of Fiat + Alfa Romeo who build driving positions for non-human shapes
<hr width=100% size=1>
viz current MBY on how the Ferretti 50 continues the honoured tradition of Fiat + Alfa Romeo who build driving positions for non-human shapes
<hr width=100% size=1>
tcm
...
Re: Ferretti name
hm, dodgy ground here. Ferretti does share the first few letters with Ferrari, but it has staccatto undertones. To the uninitiated, a ferretti might sound a bit like an italian ferret? Or a weird sort of verruca?
Barmaid-wise, perhaps buy two old american jeeps and offer her a ride round the carpark on one of your Willys?
<hr width=100% size=1>
hm, dodgy ground here. Ferretti does share the first few letters with Ferrari, but it has staccatto undertones. To the uninitiated, a ferretti might sound a bit like an italian ferret? Or a weird sort of verruca?
Barmaid-wise, perhaps buy two old american jeeps and offer her a ride round the carpark on one of your Willys?
<hr width=100% size=1>
tcm
...
Re: italians and boatdriving
this is an interesting aspect of itlaians v brits and i think it drives a lot of the features.
The multiple crew berths on a ferreti 50, the fiercely functional kitchen, the plain dashboard - all show that far more of the italian boaty classes buy a boat with no intention of skippering the thing themselves. I certainly has a right old scrap with the Pisa gang who were aghast i had no skipper.
By contrast, fairline feel compellled to have a galley more like a swish kitchen at home. Even brit boat testers test the bigger boats in the same way as they test a smaller boat - from the viewpoint of an owner skipper. Yet above 50 feet, non-boaty owners want big comfy seats/beds and if the kitchen is cramped, if the storage is inconvenient or the helm is awkward - only the hired helpers are affected. But crew quarters on eyties boats seem more determinedly decent, less of an afterthought.
<hr width=100% size=1>
this is an interesting aspect of itlaians v brits and i think it drives a lot of the features.
The multiple crew berths on a ferreti 50, the fiercely functional kitchen, the plain dashboard - all show that far more of the italian boaty classes buy a boat with no intention of skippering the thing themselves. I certainly has a right old scrap with the Pisa gang who were aghast i had no skipper.
By contrast, fairline feel compellled to have a galley more like a swish kitchen at home. Even brit boat testers test the bigger boats in the same way as they test a smaller boat - from the viewpoint of an owner skipper. Yet above 50 feet, non-boaty owners want big comfy seats/beds and if the kitchen is cramped, if the storage is inconvenient or the helm is awkward - only the hired helpers are affected. But crew quarters on eyties boats seem more determinedly decent, less of an afterthought.
<hr width=100% size=1>
D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
You misunderstand Ferretti boating. You dont drive the boat, your crew does so nobody cares if the helm seat requires the helmsman to assume the proportions of an orang utang
<hr width=100% size=1>
<hr width=100% size=1>
D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
Re: Ferretti name
Well I could offer to show her my Sealine but in a crowded noisy bar that might result in a slapped face and if you own a Cranchi/Fiart/Gobbi/SeaDoo that might end up in court
<hr width=100% size=1>
Well I could offer to show her my Sealine but in a crowded noisy bar that might result in a slapped face and if you own a Cranchi/Fiart/Gobbi/SeaDoo that might end up in court
<hr width=100% size=1>
jfm
Well-Known Member
All agreed, but the Freti helms dont even look nice. Even if owner isn't driving, he has to look at the thing. Whereas the Sq58 internal helm actually looks ok, with creamy leather electric recaros and suchlike
You are right tcm that fairline's sofas are too hard. I have complained, but fairline as ever refuse to accept anyone's criticism on points like this. They know best, see. Ours will have squishy internals retrofitted in the saloon and the rock hard foam will be slung out or sold to a "we buy hardcore" firm
I agree all comments about better Freti engineering generally, but their price premium is hard to justify. Yes it's a better boat than say a Fairline, but is it a few hundred grand extra? The prices are say £700k fairline and £1m Freti, for same length. I think the differences are smaller than this price difference suggests, and in a few respects the fairline is definitely better, so I would take the slighly suboptimal boat and keep the extra loot. Just imho.
You are right tcm that fairline's sofas are too hard. I have complained, but fairline as ever refuse to accept anyone's criticism on points like this. They know best, see. Ours will have squishy internals retrofitted in the saloon and the rock hard foam will be slung out or sold to a "we buy hardcore" firm
I agree all comments about better Freti engineering generally, but their price premium is hard to justify. Yes it's a better boat than say a Fairline, but is it a few hundred grand extra? The prices are say £700k fairline and £1m Freti, for same length. I think the differences are smaller than this price difference suggests, and in a few respects the fairline is definitely better, so I would take the slighly suboptimal boat and keep the extra loot. Just imho.
tcm
...
Re: Ferretti v fairline prices
i wonder if the big difference is in part due to the sterling fall against the £? Sepretly, so the prices of similar size boats sort-of fall into line a bit. So s/hand fereti and new fairline might be the way to go.
Also the cover on the tender on the back of your phantom is not quite on a bit if it's supposed to cover the oars. But it is otherwise nice and shiny compare to come in the area which seem covered in clag! ahem.
<hr width=100% size=1>
i wonder if the big difference is in part due to the sterling fall against the £? Sepretly, so the prices of similar size boats sort-of fall into line a bit. So s/hand fereti and new fairline might be the way to go.
Also the cover on the tender on the back of your phantom is not quite on a bit if it's supposed to cover the oars. But it is otherwise nice and shiny compare to come in the area which seem covered in clag! ahem.
<hr width=100% size=1>
adarcy
Well-Known Member
Re: You\'re right
A fair number of bigger boat crews do seem to have regressed, genetically speaking, short legs, long arms, funny colour hair and, most importantly, no sign of a truly advanced being - no beer/wine belly!
A fair number of bigger boat crews do seem to have regressed, genetically speaking, short legs, long arms, funny colour hair and, most importantly, no sign of a truly advanced being - no beer/wine belly!
MapisM
Well-Known Member
Price strategies (& other amenities)
Could you believe that Dodich, the Ferretti CEO, was once saved by the coast guard, because a strong wind was pushing him and his windsurf offshore?...
My first thought, when hearing that from his own voice, was: will he take the same chances when building the boats?
Later, during the same dinner, he explained that their pricing strategy is fairly simple.
They just apply a straight 20% premium price for the brand itself.
My second thought was then: shouldn't he try to convince us that their boats are worth 20% more of their price, rather than the other way round?
But apparently there are a lot of boaters around who are willing to spend more, because they do put a value on the double F logo as such. In fact, the whole Ferretti group have a record of impressive results.
Whenever they will decide to return to the stock exchange, I'd purchase some of their shares, rather than their boats.
<hr width=100% size=1>
Could you believe that Dodich, the Ferretti CEO, was once saved by the coast guard, because a strong wind was pushing him and his windsurf offshore?...
My first thought, when hearing that from his own voice, was: will he take the same chances when building the boats?
Later, during the same dinner, he explained that their pricing strategy is fairly simple.
They just apply a straight 20% premium price for the brand itself.
My second thought was then: shouldn't he try to convince us that their boats are worth 20% more of their price, rather than the other way round?
But apparently there are a lot of boaters around who are willing to spend more, because they do put a value on the double F logo as such. In fact, the whole Ferretti group have a record of impressive results.
Whenever they will decide to return to the stock exchange, I'd purchase some of their shares, rather than their boats.
<hr width=100% size=1>
jfm
Well-Known Member
Re: Price strategies (& other amenities)
They are owned by one of the Permira funds, HQ in Covent Garden, same entity that owns Little Chef, Travelodge, Homebase (till recently) and a load more, and very nearly bought Debenhams before Christmas but were pipped at the post by someone else (fortunately for me - my bonus depended onnem not buying Debs!). The Permira funds are essentially an investment club of about 100 investors, incl many of the the big US public employee pension funds. Permira have actually owned them twice in their history.
Permira will have incentivised the management to run the business for cash and EBITDA growth - somewhat different priorities from how public companies are usually run. I'm not so sure about your comment to buy shares when it's on the stock market. As a general rule, all other things being equal, one wd expect a company to perform better in the hands of a Permira type owner than as a public company, for a whole pile of reasons
<hr width=100% size=1>
They are owned by one of the Permira funds, HQ in Covent Garden, same entity that owns Little Chef, Travelodge, Homebase (till recently) and a load more, and very nearly bought Debenhams before Christmas but were pipped at the post by someone else (fortunately for me - my bonus depended onnem not buying Debs!). The Permira funds are essentially an investment club of about 100 investors, incl many of the the big US public employee pension funds. Permira have actually owned them twice in their history.
Permira will have incentivised the management to run the business for cash and EBITDA growth - somewhat different priorities from how public companies are usually run. I'm not so sure about your comment to buy shares when it's on the stock market. As a general rule, all other things being equal, one wd expect a company to perform better in the hands of a Permira type owner than as a public company, for a whole pile of reasons
<hr width=100% size=1>
MapisM
Well-Known Member
Re: Price strategies (& other amenities)
'one wd expect a company to perform better in the hands of a Permira type owner than as a public company, for a whole pile of reasons'.
That is an interesting topic indeed.
Well, maybe not that much for this forum, but hey, those who are not interested can easily jump elsewhere!...
Nowadays, companies are bought and sold based on their EBITDA multiplied by a factor, minus their NFD, and that is a fact.
But whether this means better performance overall for the target company, that's another story.
Considering your job, you surely know that a key factor when playing the private equity game is the financial leverage.
Which basically means, you buy a company and most of the price is paid by the company itself (let's forget that this is done through a newco, just to formally avoid the direct financial assistance, which wouldn't be legal - these are just technical tricks).
For these reasons, the management is rewarded on the basis of EBITDA and cash flow.
Just because through them, you create the conditions to sell companies at higher prices.
Now, is that a driving factor for getting better overall performances from these companies, compared to public companies?
I guess it's a matter of what we define as performance.
As long as we mean shareholders' profit, you're probably correct.
Looking at it from the industrial/productive perspective, this is just a modern, sophisticated way to drain financial resources from the company, to the benefit of the shareholders, paying as little (often none at all) taxes as possible on that capital gain.
Besides all that, why do you consider a company "public" just because it is on the stock market?
Also when Ferretti was listed, before Permira realized that they could have done even more money than they already did, thus de-listing the group, few would doubt that Permira was still in control.
Also during that period, their shares performed pretty well, considering the historical moment.
And I bet they will also after the next IPO.
That's the only reason for my original comment re. buying their shares rather than their boats.
But I respectfully beg to differ with your view on the reasons behind these performances.
Ferretti is growing and performing well because their management is simply damn good at its job, not because it's measured on EBITDA and cash flow.
I would go even further, saying that they're so good IN SPITE of how they're measured, if you see what I mean.
<hr width=100% size=1>
'one wd expect a company to perform better in the hands of a Permira type owner than as a public company, for a whole pile of reasons'.
That is an interesting topic indeed.
Well, maybe not that much for this forum, but hey, those who are not interested can easily jump elsewhere!...
Nowadays, companies are bought and sold based on their EBITDA multiplied by a factor, minus their NFD, and that is a fact.
But whether this means better performance overall for the target company, that's another story.
Considering your job, you surely know that a key factor when playing the private equity game is the financial leverage.
Which basically means, you buy a company and most of the price is paid by the company itself (let's forget that this is done through a newco, just to formally avoid the direct financial assistance, which wouldn't be legal - these are just technical tricks).
For these reasons, the management is rewarded on the basis of EBITDA and cash flow.
Just because through them, you create the conditions to sell companies at higher prices.
Now, is that a driving factor for getting better overall performances from these companies, compared to public companies?
I guess it's a matter of what we define as performance.
As long as we mean shareholders' profit, you're probably correct.
Looking at it from the industrial/productive perspective, this is just a modern, sophisticated way to drain financial resources from the company, to the benefit of the shareholders, paying as little (often none at all) taxes as possible on that capital gain.
Besides all that, why do you consider a company "public" just because it is on the stock market?
Also when Ferretti was listed, before Permira realized that they could have done even more money than they already did, thus de-listing the group, few would doubt that Permira was still in control.
Also during that period, their shares performed pretty well, considering the historical moment.
And I bet they will also after the next IPO.
That's the only reason for my original comment re. buying their shares rather than their boats.
But I respectfully beg to differ with your view on the reasons behind these performances.
Ferretti is growing and performing well because their management is simply damn good at its job, not because it's measured on EBITDA and cash flow.
I would go even further, saying that they're so good IN SPITE of how they're measured, if you see what I mean.
<hr width=100% size=1>
D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
Agree with you on new boats but down in the murkier depths of the secondhand market in which I am looking, there is still a price premium for a Ferretti over a Fairline but in absolute terms its a lot less than a few hundred grand so, for me, it is valid to compare say a used Squaddie 50 against a Ferretti 150 a couple of years older. The question is still the same. Does the better quality of the Ferretti justify the extra price but its easier to say yes because the price difference may only be £50k
Buying new, its a no brainer, I'd rather buy the Fairline and I couldnt see £300k of difference. Interesting question though is why can the Ferretti brand command such a price premium over Fairline. Is it just the halo effect from the fact that Ferretti make larger swisher boats, is it the tenuous offshore racing connection, better marketing, the fact that their designers know better how to give the perception of quality or is it actually backed up by experience in that Ferrettis do give less problems in service than Fairlines
<hr width=100% size=1>
Buying new, its a no brainer, I'd rather buy the Fairline and I couldnt see £300k of difference. Interesting question though is why can the Ferretti brand command such a price premium over Fairline. Is it just the halo effect from the fact that Ferretti make larger swisher boats, is it the tenuous offshore racing connection, better marketing, the fact that their designers know better how to give the perception of quality or is it actually backed up by experience in that Ferrettis do give less problems in service than Fairlines
<hr width=100% size=1>
jfm
Well-Known Member
Re: Price strategies (& other amenities)
MapisM:
I'm not going to go off on a long thread tangent here. But you misunderstood me: I said these comanies tend to perform better than public companies (I meant finacially better, which I thought was where you were becos you talked about buying shares) and I also said they are incentivised on EBITDA etc, BUT I did not make any cause-and-effect link. In your reply you write as if I did make that link. I said they tend to perform better for a whole pile of reasons.
There are lots of other points. On the tax free capital gain point that is entirely moral and proper. The capital comes from pension funds and it is widely accepted among all civilised countries that pension funds should not pay tax- the only tax on pensions should be income tax in the hands of the pensioner when he/she receives the pension income, and there should not be any more layers of tax inside the pension fund. Surely you agree?
You are wrong about the financial leverage stuff and your claim that these companies pay for themselves is naive, but I'm not gonna write lots on that as we stray into legals and economics. More important, you seem to criticise these owners for draining financial resources from the company, but I think it depends where you start from. I would argue in reverse that at a macro level public companies waste their financial resources on poor investment decisions and that private equity owned companies are the ones who, broadly, get it right. But please remeber, these greedy shareholders who benefit are ordinary folk, the pensioners of the world's big companies and public employers
<hr width=100% size=1>
MapisM:
I'm not going to go off on a long thread tangent here. But you misunderstood me: I said these comanies tend to perform better than public companies (I meant finacially better, which I thought was where you were becos you talked about buying shares) and I also said they are incentivised on EBITDA etc, BUT I did not make any cause-and-effect link. In your reply you write as if I did make that link. I said they tend to perform better for a whole pile of reasons.
There are lots of other points. On the tax free capital gain point that is entirely moral and proper. The capital comes from pension funds and it is widely accepted among all civilised countries that pension funds should not pay tax- the only tax on pensions should be income tax in the hands of the pensioner when he/she receives the pension income, and there should not be any more layers of tax inside the pension fund. Surely you agree?
You are wrong about the financial leverage stuff and your claim that these companies pay for themselves is naive, but I'm not gonna write lots on that as we stray into legals and economics. More important, you seem to criticise these owners for draining financial resources from the company, but I think it depends where you start from. I would argue in reverse that at a macro level public companies waste their financial resources on poor investment decisions and that private equity owned companies are the ones who, broadly, get it right. But please remeber, these greedy shareholders who benefit are ordinary folk, the pensioners of the world's big companies and public employers
<hr width=100% size=1>
