>No matter how destructive of shareholder value or public goods his executive decisions, it's virtually impossible for anyone else to overturn them barring some

>No matter how destructive of shareholder value or public goods his executive decisions, it's virtually impossible for anyone else to overturn them barring some novel legal line of attack... IMHO, if the CEO's decisions are destructive of public goods, shareholders aren't the ones we should go to. We should be able to stop the CEO via government powers. >but would the economy or the gaming world be worse off if he no longer had founder control? Shareholder activism has a very double edged record. Their interests aren't necessarily the public's interest or the company's. Maybe they like dividends now rather than investment - their incentives definitely point that way. Giving them more power is unlikely to end well.