I started seeing this term ESG and got curious, saw a few youtube Videos and this thing began to sound good to me, and then the RU-vid algorithm had the wisdom to send me to this video and set me straight! Thank you Professor Damodaran.
I was listening to an interview video of someone from Blackrock talking about ESG from the perspective of operation at Stanford business school. There are elements in ESG that are hard to quantify, since it covers a wide range of measures. However, it is a good thing that people put those non-quantifiable but important elements into consideration. Not very key thing can be defined clearly in theory. Can you quantify love? or responsibility for different industries or companies? For example, everyone has different idea about what a social responsibility is? How can you theorize that? I myself am an entrepreneur in the higher education realm, and it is part of my job to deal with academics. When I saw the title of this video, I knew that it must be an academic who would think this way. It is easier for them to talk than to solve problems. They have little sense of what it is like to be on the spot and make things happen, but they do care very much about how to theorise things on paper, not knowing that a reference does not have to be absolute or definable to help make a decision. It is highly likely that academics have very blur sense of what decision making is, because they do not have to make many decisions.
These are powerful words, backed by knowledge and facts. He clearly showed the absurdity and destruction coming from ESG. Well done! We need a lot more!!!
In India, there is a sudden surge of practitioners who have an understanding of ESG. I now have to take this exam just to get a hike or get into another job. Title like this feels dissapointing.
9:18 they actually don't do a really good job of telling companies what to say. As a brand strategist who has worked on many financial services over many years, I can tell you with certainty that you would be better off creating fresh idiosyncratic brands that increased specific brand equity, and with it pricing power and margins, than you would be subscribing to some globally defined "brand" that is not differentiated from your competitors in the slightest.
Oversold and overhyped is one thing, but for me, it represents market manipulation 101 and no self-respecting stock exchange should look kindly at it. A group of investors acting in concert whether that's deliberate or not, to influence the market using parameters that are other than the financial interest of those investors, and often run against it. All of this is not to mention the absurd notion that the human beings who establish ESG scoring use something other more akin to the reading of entrails that to actual science to get those scores. From a market perspective, I don't believe that anyone has done a risk or impact analysis of such a programme, which on performance so far seems to have produced results that don't do what it says on the box. On principle, the implementation of social policy is the exclusive domain of the democratically elected government in whatever country you happen to be and it is pure hubris for any organisation, whether a private one like Blackrock, or a huge international organ like the UN, to usurp this function. This will not end well, and it will definitely not produce anything like the results they are claiming it will; more likely it will do the opposite.
Your are right. Companies and Organizations work as organism. Just as young girls work to improve their image. Companies use ESG to improve image. So it more like make . So if you sell tomatos and your ESG is too then you must have alot of rotten tomatos under the surface. It is a false metrics
Professor doesn't understand ESG. The guy incorrectly believe ESG is about money and profits. ESG is about sustainability. Doing business in a sustainable way. Yes, fossil fuels will be with us for a long time, but while we use fossil fuels, we need to invest in exploring other forms of energy.
See it's people like this guy that is the problem, hen he thinks that there's no consequences irresponsible investing. He doesn't see the consequences, he just sees the numbers in his face and doesn't see the future. He thinks investing is the holy Grail of life.
What consequences? Your opinion is not fact. For instance, Global warming. Over half of people think itis bullshit. So do I. Your world view is yours. Realize you might be wrong. ESG is all about control of an economy, nothing else. It is political and pure bullshit.
Spot on. His hypothesis grossly underestimates the growing sensitisation effect which should gradually start questioning the resource heavy consumption. It's easy to say show me where it has impacted, it's like saying show me a 2 month old baby that can talk.
Backlash against woke colture would view ESG as the main culprit. Companies with high ESG are more viewed as more likely to be as source of social problems.
A Finance Institute asking why companies profit in times of crisis and there is not a single word about how everyone could participate in the financial results of these winners by simply buying stocks of these companies.
As much as I respect Damodaran (I am a disciple of his), he is not considering the value of ESG risk mitigation in the multitude of situations outside of the public markets. While it is true that for public companies ESG value creation is highly abstract and difficult to actualize, ESG risk mitigation in the private middle market, for example, has legitimate evidence of value creation for investors, privately held companies, employees, etc etc. Stakeholder-centric value creation continues to be proven and driven on the ground in the private market. And for investors, evidence of ESG integration materially affects your ability to raise capital. Over 95% of private equity GPs cite LP demand as the primary driver of ESG integration into the investment lifecycle. If the LPs want it, you won’t get your capital without it. Just saying!!!!
Your promoting WEF rhetoric. Answer this, by what right and whose authority do the have to create these measures businesses have to meet the score to get investment. Its bullshit and a form of social engineering. Well the last institution in the World who should be social engineering is Corporations. They exist to make their shareholders money. That's it. They have no social conscience . Wake up
And what happens when the company fails with a great ESG and is shown to be based on lies and then one after another they are forced to back it up or expose the scam.. They're all based on gamesmanship and lies. It's basically a ponzi type scheme.
Are you selling snake oil? SVB bankruptcy is the solid proof ESG is not what it is suppose to be. It is total 100% failure due to too much compliance with ESG.
