I am back. So is SGH, page-706

No need to be childish.

Why don't we stick to the evidence?

Read this:

https://www0.gsb.columbia.edu/mygsb/faculty/research/pubfiles/4128/Hedge fund activism Final.pdf

'Earlier studies show that when institutional investors, particularly mutual funds and pension funds, follow an activist agenda, they do not achieve significant benefits for shareholders (Karpoff (2001), Romano (2001), Black (1998), and Gillan and Starks (2007)). Our results suggest that the opposite is true of hedge funds. Unlike mutual funds and pension funds, hedge funds are able to influence corporate boards and managements due to key differences arising from their different organizational form and the incentives that they face. Hedge funds employ highly incentivized managers who manage large unregulated pools of capital. Because they are not subject to regulation that governs mutual funds and pension funds, they can hold highly concentrated positions in small numbers of companies, and use leverage and derivatives to extend their reach. Hedge fund managers also suffer few conflicts of interest because they are not beholden to the management of the firms whose shares they hold. In sum, hedge funds are better positioned to act as informed monitors than other institutional investors.'

To me that sounds like we could be in for a happy surprise when the deal is announced.

If you read the whole article you will realise that hedge funds do not always want control. Sometimes they will be happy with a smaller stake.

'Hedge funds seldom seek control and in most cases are nonconfrontational.'

Achorage NY appears to be our friend. They will guide SGH to greener pastures.

All in my opinion

Invest within your own circumstances and risk profile.