So check out CFAI’s stuff about pricing forward contracts or put-call parity. So, e.g., put-call parity says Stock + put = Call + bond Which surely must mean that Stock = Call + Bond - Put But the left side of that can vote proxies and the right side can’t and there was nothing in put-call parity about voting rights so the stock could have voting rights or not. So if put-call parity is true then voting proxies has no economic value. So how can they teach two incompatible things…
but you can only get rights to a proxy via ownership (shares/stocks) right? As a bond holder you’re simply a creditor…which means no voting rights, which I guess means this put-call parity thing is more of a rudimentary theoritical concept, instead of real-world analysis.
So you’re going with sell on the put-call parity thing… BTW - The bond in put-call parity is not a bond in the company for which you buy the stock; it’s a risk-free bond. For example, if you own GM stock at 40 and a 35 put that puts you in a much better spot than a GM 35 call and a GM bond if GM goes belly up.
thanks mates for explaining the proxy votes. the only reason i started my preps with ethics is because majority on this site suggested that i do it that way. but i agree, it would be much easier to do it right at the end.