Ann: Becoming a substantial holder, page-56

”


So if you own a business because you are attracted to it’s valuable assets and it’s future prospect, but that business is sub-optimally managed, then your response is to simply choose to cease owning that business and, thereby, deny yourself the opportunity to participate in the future potential of such a business?

In essence you forego participation in the potential intrinsic value of your company while the incompetent managers of that business continue to be gainfully employed and enriched by it.

That doesn’t sound like too equitable an outcome, objectively speaking.

Besides, if everyone adopted that sort of passive approach to business ownership, the result would be reduced executive accountability and a lowering of the quality of boards of directors.

No, when I own part of a company, and the people who work for me don’t do the right thing by me and my fellow equity holders, I feel a moral obligation to engage those errant managers, with a view to improving matters.

Unlike you, many people - thankfully - see investing in publicly listed companies as a lot more than just trying trying to jag the right squiggles on a share price chart.

I say “thankfully” because if the activist shareholder spirit didn’t exist, then boardrooms would be inhabited by even more inept and ineffective company directors than is already the case today.