Your interpretation appears to be wrong.
Like I said let's stick with the evidence.
https://www0.gsb.columbia.edu/mygsb/faculty/research/pubfiles/4128/Hedge fund activism Final.pdf
ABSTRACT
Using a large hand-collected data set from 2001 to 2006, we find that activist hedge funds in the U.S. propose strategic, operational, and financial remedies and attain success or partial success in two-thirds of the cases. Hedge funds seldom seek control and in most cases are nonconfrontational. The abnormal return around the announcement of activism is approximately 7%, with no reversal during the subsequent year. Target firms experience increases in payout, operating performance, and higher CEO turnover after activism. Our analysis provides important new evidence on the mechanisms and effects of informed shareholder monitoring.
1. I am a shareholder of SGH
2. Achorage (a hedge fund) apparently have bought debt in SGH
3. According to the above article 'hedge funds seldom seek control and in most cases are nonconfrontational
4. Target firms experience increases in payout, operating performance, and higher CEO turnover after activism.
As a shareholder I can live with the above.
As a non shareholder can you?
As I said yesterday.
Substance is the key
