For a company to allow a minor business partner to take action, based solely on fulfilling that minor business partner's personal desires, that brings no benefit to that arm of the company, while potentially harming another arm of the business is just plain crazy, illogical and poor governance.
That is the point I'm trying to make.
If somehow the royal oak decision was geared towards increasing profits then I would agree with what you said. It is not though, a business decision.
I don't know if this helps but the JV means WW's run the off premise of all venue i.e bottle shops, drive thrus etc and Brucey Boy runs the on premise ie. Bistros, Bars, Pokies. WW's keep out of Bruces business and vice versa.
Hypothetically, we could pitch for and get the Dan Murphy business (WWs owned) off Carlton and do the same thing to the Blues as they have done to us.
But Dan's is run by a blue bagger (not Bruce) so that might be tough as well!!!