No. For the non-technical user, AOL rocked (compared to the other options) from 1991 to 1995ish. And even after the Netscape was a much better browser, AOL was still the easiest way to get online until the late 90s. I still have my aol address, but that's only because I've had it since 1991 and people can find me that way.
Stock prices are a mark of success for the investor, not for the business. In a world where 70% of companies hit their earnings estimates within a few pennies, stock price and company value are different things. (When's the last time a company sold for something near its market cap?)
Often, what is good for the business in the long term may be bad for the stock price in the short term. Executives who have incentives purely based on stock are probably not making decisions for the best of the company in the long term.
That said, stock prices are (somewhat) externally created and measured, so they are one good measure of a company's success. But they shouldn't be the only good measure.
No. For the non-technical user, AOL rocked (compared to the other options) from 1991 to 1995ish. And even after the Netscape was a much better browser, AOL was still the easiest way to get online until the late 90s. I still have my aol address, but that's only because I've had it since 1991 and people can find me that way.
Stock prices are a mark of success for the investor, not for the business. In a world where 70% of companies hit their earnings estimates within a few pennies, stock price and company value are different things. (When's the last time a company sold for something near its market cap?)
Often, what is good for the business in the long term may be bad for the stock price in the short term. Executives who have incentives purely based on stock are probably not making decisions for the best of the company in the long term.
That said, stock prices are (somewhat) externally created and measured, so they are one good measure of a company's success. But they shouldn't be the only good measure.