|
From A Reader: At a recent gathering of the global hedge fund regulatory mandarins, the term “investor activism” was discussed.
A suggestion was made that the term ”investor engagement” was the more appropriate for the situation.
The term “activist” conjures up visions of unruly mobs of long haired hippies gate crashing board rooms, spraying slogans across the portrait of the chairman. Alternatively nuclear activists squatting outside of nuclear plants. Generally the actions are uncoordinated, control is lacking and physical violence can result.
Investors are on the whole a rather passive bunch and tend to walk with their money rather than enforce their rights. However, is it right to call them “activists” when some of them stand up and put proposals forward that their investment objectives are met? I would think not, for example, by attending a political party meeting, entering into the political discussions and then exercising a vote does that mean to say I am a political “activist”?
Who coined this term “Investor Activist”? Is it the embattled company chairman who is now faced with dissatisfied investors or is it the journalist seeking a sensational headline? A press headline of “Hedge Fund Investor Activists” is like having four cherries in a row on a slot machine.
Surely much of the action is of a far more genteel nature- investors coming forward and saying that the job is being well done, but can be done better. No pu...................... To view our full article Click here
|
RSS
