GPU’s are a family business it would seem.
Su’s mother and Nvidia co-founder and former CEO Jensen Huang are first cousins. Su’s maternal grandfather is the eldest brother of Huang’s mother.
GPU’s are a family business it would seem.
Su’s mother and Nvidia co-founder and former CEO Jensen Huang are first cousins. Su’s maternal grandfather is the eldest brother of Huang’s mother.
Are you guys just now learning that corporations have a legal obligation to their shareholders and nobody else? It’s literally built into their DNA like an animal’s drive to reproduce.
Anyone running AMD who made a different choice would be violating their fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders.
That’s how C corps are designed.
They don’t have a legal obligation to their shareholders. This is a a huge lie that is told to scapegoat the CEOs that enable consulting firms to carve up competitors for even bigger money. They have an obligation only to the board members.
This is an IMPORTANT distinction that is what fuedalized corporate America to such an extreme.
Here’s an older article from the NYT that goes over in greater detail exactly how correct you are. But let me just say you are so correct and GOD this is a frustrating one to see so commonly believed.
That isn’t what fiduciary duty means. It means they can’t purposefully run the company into the ground. But any choice that can be justified, for example as “I don’t believe this AI thing is going to be all that and we should remain focused on our consumer markets for long term growth” immediately nixes any complaint about fiduciary duty. I mean unless the board can produce evidence that that’s a lie.
If the board disagrees with the CEO about the direction of the company they can replace the CEO, but again, the board and CEO can do anything reasonable.