It may seem like splitting hairs, but the Chancery court's decision makes sense. Corporate governance sounds boring and technical, but it is an important soundi

It may seem like splitting hairs, but the Chancery court's decision makes sense. Corporate governance sounds boring and technical, but it is an important sounding board for valuation and consent. Imagine a company where two people collectively owned 51% of a public company, one of them more "in charge" than the other. If they start making all kinds of ad hoc decisions without shareholder consent, then they will never hear some important feedback from their fellow owners. What if 48% of the other shareholders don't like how they're doing x? It might just change how things are run. Minority votes and feedback are important, especially when you consider that the majority of shareholders of public companies are institutional investors they have every right to make sure their feedback is taken seriously by their executives, whether or not those executive happen to be majority shareholders or not. Don't like the rules? Then don't go public.