Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to www.scribd.com

Scribd
Upload
18 views1 page

Tutorial 3 Answers

Berkshire Hathaway may own furniture retailers for bargaining power, economies of scale, and cross-selling abilities but managing many businesses poses risks. Allowing shareholder input on acquisitions could improve governance but hinder quick decisions. Shareholders have limited influence due to Buffett's hands-off approach but can vote for the board and sell shares.

Uploaded by

aobakwempatane67
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
18 views1 page

Tutorial 3 Answers

Berkshire Hathaway may own furniture retailers for bargaining power, economies of scale, and cross-selling abilities but managing many businesses poses risks. Allowing shareholder input on acquisitions could improve governance but hinder quick decisions. Shareholders have limited influence due to Buffett's hands-off approach but can vote for the board and sell shares.

Uploaded by

aobakwempatane67
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Here are the answers to your questions:

1. Berkshire Hathaway might own several furniture retailers for a number of reasons. Some
possible advantages include:

o Increased bargaining power with suppliers.

o Economies of scale in areas such as marketing and distribution.

o The ability to cross-sell products and services to customers.

o The ability to learn from the best practices of different retailers. Some possible
disadvantages include:

o The need to manage a large and complex portfolio of businesses.

o The risk of overpaying for acquisitions.

o The risk of conflicts of interest between different retailers.

2. Whether or not Berkshire Hathaway should allow stockholders to suggest or vote on


potential acquisitions is a complex question. There are arguments to be made on both sides.

On the one hand, giving stockholders more say in the company's decisions could help to improve
corporate governance and ensure that the company is acting in the best interests of all shareholders.
Additionally, it could help to build trust and loyalty among shareholders.

On the other hand, giving stockholders too much power could make it difficult for the company to
make quick decisions or take risks. Additionally, it could lead to a situation where the company is
constantly being second-guessed by its shareholders.

Ultimately, the decision of whether to allow stockholders to suggest or vote on potential acquisitions
is a decision that should be made by the board of directors of Berkshire Hathaway.

3. Berkshire Hathaway's stockholders are likely to have limited influence over the management
of the conglomerate or one of the conglomerate's companies. This is because Warren
Buffett, the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, is known for his hands-off approach to
management. He believes that the best way to run a company is to hire good managers and
then give them the freedom to do their jobs.

However, Berkshire Hathaway's stockholders do have some influence over the company. They can
vote on the board of directors, and they can also sell their shares if they are unhappy with the way
the company is being run.

Ultimately, the amount of influence that Berkshire Hathaway's stockholders have over the company
is a matter of degree. It is up to the board of directors and Warren Buffett to decide how much input
they want from shareholders.

You might also like