>> are not a cohesive organisation capable of effectively directing the strategy of the company
> They don't need to be: they just need to communicate their priorities to that manager. In this case, they communicated that they value short-term goals over long-term.
Consider copyright: extending copyright helps the owners of copyright, reducing it provides a smaller benefit to every member of the public. Because the copyright holders are better organised as a class they are better equipped to lobby congress and influence politics, leading to the indefinite extension of copyright.
I think the parent was arguing something similar. It's not at all clear that the shareholders at large prefer short term goals. Instead, an influential minority appears to have coordinated on this issue for their own benefit. The disadvantages are spread over a much larger group of passive shareholders, employees, customers, etc.
> They don't need to be: they just need to communicate their priorities to that manager. In this case, they communicated that they value short-term goals over long-term.
Consider copyright: extending copyright helps the owners of copyright, reducing it provides a smaller benefit to every member of the public. Because the copyright holders are better organised as a class they are better equipped to lobby congress and influence politics, leading to the indefinite extension of copyright.
I think the parent was arguing something similar. It's not at all clear that the shareholders at large prefer short term goals. Instead, an influential minority appears to have coordinated on this issue for their own benefit. The disadvantages are spread over a much larger group of passive shareholders, employees, customers, etc.