Gay marriage plebiscite - Result YES to SSM

Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?

  • Yes

  • No

  • Not Voting


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Flanagun

Banned
In the Sin Bin
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
22,588
Reaction score
20,581
Of course it won't affect their bottom line. But it absolutely does not reflect all of their shareholders, and possibly not even a majority of their shareholders.
I'm sure the majority shareholders approve. If minor shareholders don't, they can always sell their shares. It is up to a CEO and board to determine such things and a company adopting a pro ssm stance is in no way, shape or form bullying. No campaigners such as Bernardi, Shelton etc have used their right to free speech as a baton in this debate, so if you can't accept the reality a privately run business has a right to advocate a yes vote in a less antagonistic and confrontational way, it's hard to take your POV seriously. Your point just seems totally illogical and counter intuitive to me.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,157
Reaction score
29,681
Board members in ASX listed organisations almost NEVER control the majority of shares. In fact I'm not sure that is true of any ASX listed organisations.

So if you're trying to say that a majority of shareholders would have approved of any ASX listed organisations supporting the Yes campaign, I still say that is 100% wrong.

CEO's and their management have made this decision without knowledge of whether the majority shareholders (or a majority of the shareholders) support it.
In a publicly distributed share company where the mass public is the majority then all decisions are made by the board and management on behalf of the shareholders. This is for all decisions. The shareholders only make decisions on board elections and certain other things that are set by the company.

It varies per company but have you ever known a company to ask its masses of shareholders on what ad campaign they should run?
 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,498
Reaction score
20,440
Who do you think brought the idea to the table? It didn't just magically appear on the agenda.
And?

What's your point?

His bosses still have the power to say no.

So I'm struggling to see what point you're making
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
I'm sure the majority shareholders approve. If minor shareholders don't, they can always sell their shares. It is up to a CEO and board to determine such things and a company adopting a pro ssm stance is in no way, shape or form bullying. No campaigners such as Bernardi, Shelton etc have used their right to free speech as a baton in this debate, so if you can't accept the reality a privately run business has a right to advocate a yes vote in a less antagonistic and confrontational way, it's hard to take your POV seriously. Your point just seems totally illogical and counter intuitive to me.
You're getting your terminology completely wrong.

We are not talking about privately run businesses. We are talking about publicly listed organisations like Qantas, CBA, ANZ etc.

When people talk about 'public companies' they are referring to the fact they are listed on a stock exchange for the 'public' to invest in.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
In a publicly distributed share company where the mass public is the majority then all decisions are made by the board and management on behalf of the shareholders. This is for all decisions. The shareholders only make decisions on board elections and certain other things that are set by the company.

It varies per company but have you ever known a company to ask its masses of shareholders on what ad campaign they should run?
If they were making a decision on the business of the organisation (i.e. for Qantas the business of flying planes, or for CBA and ANZ the business of lending money) then I agree, the management are put in place on behalf of shareholders.

If they want to step outside the bounds of their mandate then personally I believe they should be going for approval.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,157
Reaction score
29,681
If they were making a decision on the business of the organisation (i.e. for Qantas the business of flying planes, or for CBA and ANZ the business of lending money) then I agree, the management are put in place on behalf of shareholders.

If they want to step outside the bounds of their mandate then personally I believe they should be going for approval.
That could be a long process. That would mean that they would need to contact every shareholder every time they wanted to run an advertising campaign that may have a chance of offending someone.

For many businesses this is just a PR campaign. Do you think every PR campaign should go through the shareholders?
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
That could be a long process. That would mean that they would need to contact every shareholder every time they wanted to run an advertising campaign that may have a chance of offending someone.

For many businesses this is just a PR campaign. Do you think every PR campaign should go through the shareholders?
I agree with you.

If a company just wants to run an advertising campaign then the management have the authority to do it.

But when it's a political & social issue that has essentially nothing to do with the operations of a company (and this is just my personal opinion), a company shouldn't comment on it. Particularly when it's so divisive as SSM and when it's clear there is such a huge divide in opinion in the country.

I do accept that there is nothing illegal about what any of these companies have done - I just find it really unfair to any of their staff who have an alternative view, but because the CEO thinks another way - that staff member can't voice their opinion because of fear for their job/career.
 

Flanagun

Banned
In the Sin Bin
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
22,588
Reaction score
20,581
You're getting your terminology completely wrong.

We are not talking about privately run businesses. We are talking about publicly listed organisations like Qantas, CBA, ANZ etc.

When people talk about 'public companies' they are referring to the fact they are listed on a stock exchange for the 'public' to invest in.
Fair enough, I could have phrased it more accurately. I'll put it another way. These companies are not state run or owned....I suppose what I really mean is when you dispense with the formalities of technical definitions, these companies are still essentially governed by private citizens and not the average Ma and Pa who might have small shares in a company. Anyway, you are dwelling on a small semantic point which doesn't for a minute change the lack of logic of your argument. Even so called publicly traded companies are for the most part, privately owned by their majority shareholders and it is these majority shareholders who generally have influence over and guide a company's business and public policy positions. If you don't like a stance a company or corporation takes on this, your only possible avenue of recourse is to vote with your wallet.
 

Wahesh

The Forefather of The Kennel
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
24,848
Reaction score
12,169
And?

What's your point?

His bosses still have the power to say no.

So I'm struggling to see what point you're making
The board say "No" to a gay CEO offering to have their brand support marriage equality?

Have you not seen what's been happening to those against SSM? They get gored by the Yes Nazis!
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
The board say "No" to a gay CEO offering to have their brand support marriage equality?

Have you not seen what's been happening to those against SSM? They get gored by the Yes Nazis!
Stop being homophobic!!!
 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,498
Reaction score
20,440
The board say "No" to a gay CEO offering to have their brand support marriage equality?

Have you not seen what's been happening to those against SSM? They get gored by the Yes Nazis!
Nazis???

Wow

Same question I asked Britt

Where is your proof?

Stop being homophobic!!!
I think you two have displayed what intolerance is in the space of two posts
 

The DoggFather

ASSASSIN
Premium Member
Gilded
Site's Top Poster
Joined
Sep 2, 2012
Messages
107,537
Reaction score
119,944
Sounds like you should be a Libertarian or an Anarchist. Both pushing to get rid of the government.
I just have a brain and like to use it lol

No labels for me thanks lol

I don't want government gone, I just want an honest, competent government.
 

The DoggFather

ASSASSIN
Premium Member
Gilded
Site's Top Poster
Joined
Sep 2, 2012
Messages
107,537
Reaction score
119,944
Ladies and gentlemen, one of the poster children for the No campaign, Cory Bernardi...

Craigburn Primary School’s ‘wear a dress’ fundraiser blasted by Senator Cory Bernardi, but comments hike donations
UPDATE: AN Adelaide primary school’s “wear a dress day” has been labelled absurd by Senator Cory Bernardi — but his comments backfired, pushing the fundraiser far above its $900 goal.

Matt Smith
The AdvertiserSEPTEMBER 21, 201710:11AM




Follow
Cory Bernardi

✔@corybernardi

One school in SA now has 'wear a dress day'. This gender morphing is really getting absurd#auspolhttp://blogs.craigburn.sa.edu.au/blog/2017/09/19/doing-it-in-a-dress-casual-day-fundraiser/ …

5:07 PM - Sep 20, 2017


Polldaddy.com
The leader of the Australian Conservatives and a vocal supporter of traditional marriage has questioned the timing of the fundraiser.

South Australia’s Education Minister Susan Close defended the decision, saying the student-led fundraiser had nothing to do with the debate about marriage equality.

Senator Bernardi this morning said it was “entirely inappropriate” and “bordering on the absurb”.

He told The Advertiser he did not understand why the tradition of casual dress day had suddenly become “wear a dress to school day”.

“In the midst of a debate about the safe school gender ideology program, the redefinition of marriage and attempts to de-genderise society it seems this school is playing into a political cause rather than an educational one,” Senator Bernardi said.



Cory Bernardi speaks at the Coalition for Marriage’s anti-same-sex marriage campaign event in Adelaide on Tuesday. Picture: AAP/Matt LoxtonSource:News Corp Australia

“Why are we suddenly encouraging boys and male teachers to wear a dress?”

Senator Bernardi’s comments have driven people to pledge money to the fundraiser, with prominent gay ABC comedian Josh Thomas tweeting his support and a link to the fundraising page.

The original goal was $900, but at 11.30pm SA time, it was more than $16,000, and by 8.30am this morning it more than $20,000.

Thomas confirmed to The Advertiser he’d donated $2000.

Parents of children at the school have taken to social media to back the fundraiser.

Writing on the Craigburn Connections blog, Rob Walker said:

“Great way to have a bit of fun while raising awareness & funds for African kids!

(from a former School Councillor & dad of 3 Craigburn kids!)”

And Mark Sansome agreed: “What an amazing lesson for the kids! The power of social media wins and a great fundraising effort. Well done Craigburn, so proud of my kids school.”

Nicola Cornish wrote: What a fantastic charity and a great opportunity for our children to learn about those less fortunate than themselves. Must admit I am looking forward to seeing the dresses!!”

Ms Close said Senator Bernardi’s comments were ridiculous and incorrect.

“Craigburn Primary School is raising money to help girls in Africa have access to education,” Ms Close said.

“The funds will go towards books and other resources.

“This is a student-led initiative and is completely unrelated to the current marriage equality debate.

“Senator Bernardi should check his facts before incorrectly naming and shaming a school undertaking charity work.”



A school blog post promoting the fundraiser was deleted shortly after The Advertisercontacted the Education Department late Wednesday afternoon, but was put back up online later in the evening.

The blog post said for a gold coin donation all the staff and students will be wearing a dress to school. “Of course, it you don’t feel comfortable wearing a dress you can just come in casual clothes,” the post said.

“The main thing to focus on is raising as much money as possible.”

Craigburn Primary caters for 500 students, mainly from Flagstaff Hill, Aberfoyle Park and Coromandel Valley, in Reception to year 7.
Who declared this fuckwit the poster boy? What a dumb ****.
 

Flanagun

Banned
In the Sin Bin
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
22,588
Reaction score
20,581
The board say "No" to a gay CEO offering to have their brand support marriage equality?

Have you not seen what's been happening to those against SSM? They get gored by the Yes Nazis!
The yes Nazis? Err, do you have any idea about the amount of vitriol Madlin Sims has received for her decision to part ways with a contractor? Or even worse, the amount of vitriol a similar company with a similar name has received from the same group of outraged idiots despite the fact their business is completely unaffiliated with Sims' business and had actually offered that same contractor work. Elements of the No campaign are so busy being outraged they can't even be bothered to make sure they are being outraged at the right people......but go ahead, keep pretending all no campaigners are civil, mild mannered, upstanding citizens and all the anger is coming from the yes side. What a load of simplistic shit. Can you honestly not see how narrow and limited your viewpoint on this matter is?
 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,498
Reaction score
20,440
The yes Nazis? Err, do you have any idea about the amount of vitriol Madlin Sims has received for her decision to part ways with a contractor? Or even worse, the amount of vitriol a similar company with a similar name has received from the same group of outraged idiots despite the fact their business is completely unaffiliated with Sims' business and had actually offered that same contractor work. Elements of the No campaign are so busy being outraged they can't even be bothered to make sure they are being outraged at the right people......but go ahead, keep pretending all no campaigners are civil, mild mannered, upstanding citizens and all the anger is coming from the yes side. What a load of simplistic shit. Can you honestly not see how narrow and limited your viewpoint on this matter is?
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/afl-house-evacuated-after-threat-20170921-gylu9a.html

There's a hell of lot more but we haven't spent our time being outraged by the actions of the deplorable

Instead we've actually concentrated on the topic and argued the topic

While the no supporters have spent a shit load of time outraged by these other issues and completely ignoring the other shit their side does

But the yes side are "Nazis " And "forcing " other people to take their views
 

Wahesh

The Forefather of The Kennel
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
24,848
Reaction score
12,169
The yes Nazis? Err, do you have any idea about the amount of vitriol Madlin Sims has received for her decision to part ways with a contractor? Or even worse, the amount of vitriol a similar company with a similar name has received from the same group of outraged idiots despite the fact their business is completely unaffiliated with Sims' business and had actually offered that same contractor work. Elements of the No campaign are so busy being outraged they can't even be bothered to make sure they are being outraged at the right people......but go ahead, keep pretending all no campaigners are civil, mild mannered, upstanding citizens and all the anger is coming from the yes side. What a load of simplistic shit. Can you honestly not see how narrow and limited your viewpoint on this matter is?
Narrow and limited? You should know that's how I view you. You know why? Because they did it behind the safety of their computers on the internet, genius. Do you honestly think they'd do something like that out in public? Come on mate, you're smarter than that, surely.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,157
Reaction score
29,681
I'd say it's common sense. The CEO is gay. Logic says he is the one who would've brought up the idea.
I'd say there's a higher chance that one of the PR managers said "Gay vote. The CEO is gay... let's milk this for all it's worth"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top