The CEO is SUPPOSED to work for the shareholders, but, in reality, just like you and me, he works for himself first, and hopes he can fool the guy who signs his paycheck and stock options into thinking what he does helps the shareholders, or whomever, it's supposed to benefit. (Erik ... remember that grammar lesson I preached at you a week or two ago? In this case, whomever is objective case, while in the erroneous example to which I then referred, it was subjective case. In this case, it's the object of the infinitive, to benefit.)

It's just as it is with our elected politicians. What they do benefits them, but what they say is for our benefit.

Likewise, the real estate salesman is supposed to be working for the benefit of the seller. The reason for that, if it's not obvious, is that the seller, when all is said and done, is the only one certain to have money with which to pay him. In reality, he'd much rather have the commission after a week and sell the house for 15% less, than wait ten weeks and get the full price. Now, whom is that going to benefit?

RE