Ride-hailing company Lyft is expected to start a roadshow this week to promote its initial public offering. As executives meet investors, they will be attempting to sell a structure that would grant Lyft’s two founders 20 votes per share compared to just one vote per share for everyone else.
Lyft will no doubt argue that its founders need such lopsided corporate governance to protect them from activist investors — firms like mine, which are accused of demanding short-term results at the expense of long-term growth. In fact, studies show that companies with dual-class structures tend to underperform over the long term.
That is because shareholder accountability is often the best corrective for a company that has lost its way. In my experience, this is especially true in the technology sector, where enthusiasm for dual-class structures runs highest.