Staggered board

S

spud99

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2026
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
Is it a staggered board better for shareholders as supposed to board members serving their time and being elected every so often...i think they were the same things. But ive seen both options given...
 
there are arguements for both sides :) i remember there was a question on this but i dont remember which side of the arguement they were asking about. i felt confident in my answer though
 
It says in schweser which doesn't help one bit....

"Whether there are annual elections or staggered multiple year terms (a classified board). A classified board may serve another purpose - to act as a takeover defense."
 
i got a question wrong in either book 6 or qbank and made a note to myself. i agree that the notes didnt cover it very well. there are are agruements for both ways. i think the question on the exam specified which arguement you were supposed to support. it didnt ask if it was good or bad :)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at Monday, June 4, 2007 at 10:51PM by nolabird032.
 
Ya i had no clue about it...but i marked it NOT good because that's the only thing that i remembered from schweser.

overall, schweser did a very bad job at this LOS. and me too.
 
staggered boards are bad for shareholders b/c it doesn't allow shareholders to replace "non-independent" board members. i think the question pertained to which is in the best interests of shareholders or something like that...
 
yeah, for this question staggered boards were NOT good b/c they wanted pretty much the most ease in switching up members. staggered boards better for stability, but hard to really make big changes all at once.

funny enough- the schweser corp governance stuff for '06 in their books (ethics also) was way better IMO than '07. ahh, the perks of failing once already... i studied ethics from the handbook and my '06 notes more so than my '07's.

from all of the chat on this board lately, though, i will be lucky to throw up a 70%+ on this section- I think I'm a likely 50-70% on this section but leaning towards the higher side.
 
Yea, staggered is definitely bad. In an ideal world of corp governance, a shareholder would be able to vote board members on or off on a daily basis.
 
could some explain to me using baby steps was a staggered board is? I tried to google it but the links I'm finding are not clear at all.
 
A staggered board = the senate

People don't go up for election every year, so it is harder to reorganize the makeup of the board. Keeping to my example, if the senate wasn't staggered, a lot more republicans would have probably been replaced by democrats this last election. So the effect of the staggered elections is that the public can't have as much influence as they would like with each election.
 
Young_Prof Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A staggered board = the senate
>
> People don't go up for election every year, so it
> is harder to reorganize the makeup of the board.
> Keeping to my example, if the senate wasn't
> staggered, a lot more republicans would have
> probably been replaced by democrats this last
> election. So the effect of the staggered elections
> is that the public can't have as much influence as
> they would like with each election.

ah that makes more sense, thanks Young_Prof!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top