Forum Home Page [see Broadridge note below]

 The Shareholder ForumTM`

Fair Investor Access

This public program was initiated in collaboration with The Conference Board Task Force on Corporate/Investor Engagement and with Thomson Reuters support of communication technologies. The Forum is providing continuing reports of the issues that concern this program's participants, as summarized  in the January 5, 2015 Forum Report of Conclusions.

"Fair Access" Home Page

"Fair Access" Program Reference


Related Projects 2012-2019

For graphed analyses of company and related industry returns, see

Returns on Corporate Capital

See also analyses of

Shareholder Support Rankings


Forum reference:

Evidence that activist attacks on weak management improve efficiency of innovation


For the commentary author's referenced study of compelling statistics correlating activist interventions with efficiency of innovation in the production of goods and services, see


Source: Fortune, August 27, 2015 commentary and video

Fortune Insider  Activist Investors

Nelson Peltz and activist investors are not as evil as you think


 by Wei Jiang       August 27, 2015, 11:45 AM EDT


Nelson Peltz in his office in New York

Photo: Ben Hoffman


Activist investors are actually doing something good for the companies they target, the economy as a whole, and quite probably your portfolio.

Itís one of the most fundamental questions in business: Do you issue dividends or re-invest in capital improvements and R&D to strengthen a company for the long-term?

Much has been said recently about the evils of ďshort-termism.Ē Itís the M.O. of activist investors who take sizeable stakes in companies, then agitate for changes they think will boost share prices. Take for instance Nelson Peltzís Trian Fund Managementís unsuccessful proxy fight over board seats at Dupont (DD). Short-termism, critics say, diverts funds from investments that can produce sustained growth ó such as workforce training and new product development Ė but have little immediate payoff. The short-term investors, meanwhile, benefit from a spike in stock prices, and take their money and run.

Or so the common wisdom goes.

Granted, investors have been turning over shares much faster over the past two decades. About 20 years ago, the average share in a public company changed hands about once a year; now itís once every four months. But short-termism isnít the scourge itís cracked up to be. Hereís why:

Short-term trading doesnít equal short-term decisions by managers.

Itís logical that company executives, eager to appease shareholders, might make short-sighted decisions. Think about it: shareholders receive a return in one of two ways. One is a current dividend; the other is the price at which they exit. Assuming an efficient market, stock price is the properly discounted value of future cash flows. If a company damages its long-term prospects, the exit price is low. Thatís something no one wants, especially short-term investors.

Activists play a vital role in markets

Markets are not necessarily efficient for all stocks all the time. Market inefficiency implies mispricing, which is why active investors exist. Based on the horizon of mispricing, active managers specialize. Some, such as Warren Buffet, specialize in long-term mispricing. Others specialize in the shortest-horizon mispricing, e.g., high-frequency traders. Activist investors exist in the middle of this spectrum, two to three years on average. They target firms whose current prices are not necessarily mispriced but are undervalued relative to its potential. Once the undervaluation is corrected, the activists move on.

Dividends remain in the ecosystem

People tend to associate certain policies, notably paying back cash to shareholders, with short-termism. They assume that the funds used for payback disappear from the ecosystem. If cash reserves are parked in T-bills, itís more productive to put the money back into the hands of shareholders who can then choose to invest in firms and ventures they deem promising. In the end, payouts do not necessarily reduce investments, but allocate the choice of investment from managers to investors.

R&D is a form of investment that should be subject to economic reasoning.

The most compelling defense of activist investors is that they donít impede innovation. In fact, they help reshape it.

Activist investors donít slash budgets indiscriminately. They treat R&D as a form of investment where an investment with a positive net-present value will be a profitable one.

Research I conducted along with Alon Brav and Song Ma of Duke University, and Xuan Tian of Indiana University, shows when activists targeted firms with diverse business portfolios, they examined whether outlays for R&D were directed toward the firmís core competency. If not, those funds were likely to be cut. The activistsí intentions werenít malevolent; they simply wanted to ensure that companies were highly focused.

Short-termism doesnít artificially inflate stock price

There is no evidence that investors systematically undervalue firms whose projects are long-term where cash flow is highly uncertain and will take significant time to materialize. In fact, multiple market-wide bubbles were formed by investorsí unrealistically optimistic valuation of such firms.

Itís hard to argue that short-term investors are bad for business. So give them a break. Theyíre actually doing something good for the companies they target, the economy as a whole, and quite probably your portfolio.

Wei Jiang is the Arthur F. Burns Professor of Free and Competitive Enterprise at Columbia Business School. Jiang is also director of the schoolís Jerome A. Chazen Institute of International Business.


This Forum program was open, free of charge, to anyone concerned with investor interests in the development of marketplace standards for expanded access to information for securities valuation and shareholder voting decisions. As stated in the posted Conditions of Participation, the purpose of this public Forum's program was to provide decision-makers with access to information and a free exchange of views on the issues presented in the program's Forum Summary. Each participant was expected to make independent use of information obtained through the Forum, subject to the privacy rights of other participants.  It is a Forum rule that participants will not be identified or quoted without their explicit permission.

This Forum program was initiated in 2012 in collaboration with The Conference Board and with Thomson Reuters support of communication technologies to address issues and objectives defined by participants in the 2010 "E-Meetings" program relevant to broad public interests in marketplace practices. The website is being maintained to provide continuing reports of the issues addressed in the program, as summarized in the January 5, 2015 Forum Report of Conclusions.

Inquiries about this Forum program and requests to be included in its distribution list may be addressed to

The information provided to Forum participants is intended for their private reference, and permission has not been granted for the republishing of any copyrighted material. The material presented on this web site is the responsibility of Gary Lutin, as chairman of the Shareholder Forum.

Shareholder Forumô is a trademark owned by The Shareholder Forum, Inc., for the programs conducted since 1999 to support investor access to decision-making information. It should be noted that we have no responsibility for the services that Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc., introduced for review in the Forum's 2010 "E-Meetings" program and has since been offering with the ďShareholder ForumĒ name, and we have asked Broadridge to use a different name that does not suggest our support or endorsement.