> 'Corporations' are about sociology and the practical
> economics of industrial organization. Capital is
> more abstract. Not exactly opposing concepts.
I think it's the other way around. Capital as a social class relation is all too real. The corporation is an attempt to mask those class relations by, among other things, separating owners of capital from workers by means of large layers of managers and other flotsam.
> I might also note -- in fact I definitely will --
> that the empirical study of corporations reveals
> controlling motives other than profit maximization,
> a shortcoming in Marx that dovetails with his
> focus on "capital."
Au contraire, Max. You're confusing reported profits and surplus value. Excluding fixed capital replacement, surplus value is that left over after (productive) labor is paid its living standards. Reported profits are but one element of that. These other "controlling motives" you refer to are another part of, and are paid out of, surplus value--whether it's more benefits for managers and other corp. execs (pay or other perks), fancier office buildings, etc. In other words, all of the things typically cited by scholars that corp. managers can prefer to reported profits that are available to stockholders. Focussing on them is just another way to expand surplus value, but change the distribution of it.
Marx wrote about capital as self-expanding (surplus) value, not profits. You haven't identified any "shortcoming". But don't let me discourage from continuing to try.
RO