Hi Ken:

quote:

"I must stress that Bose does not now, and has never paid one penny to a stockholder. We pour 100% of our earnings back into our work."

I borrowed the above quote from another thread in this section so as not to take the original thread off-topic.

If stockholders were made to understand that they were buying into a product whose direction is decided by the company - not by the stockholders - wouldn't it then not make a difference if Bose had stockholders?

I've heard the argument about stockholders making demands on a company, which ultimately influence the direction of that company in ways that prove detrimental to the companies good fortune. I would have thought that the stockholders could be made aware that they are buying into a product based on their confidence in that product...but the final say as to how the product is marketed, etc., would always lie with Bose Corp.

Comments?

Thanks,

Stu

If Bose had stockholders they would not be able to reinvest 100% of their profits back into product development as they would have to pay shareholders out of the profits.
Best to keep it a private company.

Robert L