As far as I know, shareholders aren't required to go on paying every time the company needs a hand, and they're still regarded as holding their shares, so they don't lose out unless the company actually goes bust. I'm not sure how this bears on the question at this stage.
They lose out because their shares are worth less.
Who do you think shareholders are? This table shows a breakdown of categories of UK shareholders (along with an unhelpful 'rest of world' category).
Of them, I'd say that the beneficiaries of pension funds certainly spend their money on necessities and the kind of luxuries you describe. So do many individuals. For example, I sold some of my stocks and shares ISA to pay for my wedding.
Charities and churches use their profits to provide services and/or 'tangible' goods to people. Similarly, insurance companies provide a service.
My financial literacy isn't really good enough to tell you what the others do, but I think what I'm saying is that the £875m translates into lots and lots of £25.80s for lots of people.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2011-01-11 11:45 am (UTC)They lose out because their shares are worth less.
Who do you think shareholders are? This table shows a breakdown of categories of UK shareholders (along with an unhelpful 'rest of world' category).
Of them, I'd say that the beneficiaries of pension funds certainly spend their money on necessities and the kind of luxuries you describe. So do many individuals. For example, I sold some of my stocks and shares ISA to pay for my wedding.
Charities and churches use their profits to provide services and/or 'tangible' goods to people. Similarly, insurance companies provide a service.
My financial literacy isn't really good enough to tell you what the others do, but I think what I'm saying is that the £875m translates into lots and lots of £25.80s for lots of people.