Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456
Don't expect me to research a point that you want to put over.
You do the research and you prove your point.
I do know the difference between de facto and de jure BTW.
|
You're the one trying to make the point not me. I know the Murdoch's control Sky, it is you who think they don't.
The fact that you said that Murdoch has de facto holdings of 39% demonstrates you don't understand the difference. That's de jure... You also probably think to control a company you must own more than 50% of a companies' shares...
Point 1: After the merger Murdoch held a 50% stake in BskyB. All other shareholders held smaller stakes and could not outvote him.
Point 2: After the merger Murdoch's man (Chisholm) became boss of the company. Murdoch became chairman with de facto control over the board.
Point 3: The sky branding and technology was used for the merged company.
That's 3 clear reasons why Murdoch did then and still does now, control Sky.