RE: RE: Rio's board members
You're right, there is an element of fiction just the same as the jury being told to "disregard the evidence you just heard". Which is why is was Huberman, an independent director who made the last IVN announcement, not a management or RF appointee.
Directors when acting for the company have a clear obligation to act in the best interests of the company as an entity. If they have a conflct they must declare it, and abstain from voting in most cases. Which is why in bid situations the board will usually hive off a committee of independent board members who go out and seek their own advice and correspond with the shareholders independent of management.
Remember, most of what the Board actually has to attend to is oversight of the underlying business - issues like how to treat sewage or buy insurance, or visas and taxes etc,., aren't exactly the stuff of hot controversy. Rio appointee directors would generally not vote on any matter directly concerning Rio as a principal.
All these big operator companies that can fight tooth and nail over new properties, buyers, take-overs and the like are typically involved in joint ventures with each other all over the world, so they fight, but they do it within bounds generally. I think most people might be surprised by how onerous and restrictive the requirements for acting as a director of a big company are - laws and liabilities up the ying yang. Once there is real capital built up in the business everybody with a big stake has their lawyer on speed dial. Just ask Lord Tubby Black, not guilty of fraud, just obstruction of justice, now sipping Orange Freshie from a plastic cup in a Florida Federal Penitentary,
But point taken, the Board has to operate involving lots of counter-interests. Which is why there are meetings, and then there are "meetings".
cg