Re: "not in the best interests of shareholders"
That is the theory at least, though in practice it virtually never happens. Instead, investors prefer to buy enough stock to get a seat on the board, 4 - 5% is usually enough, and get the ball rolling there. Shareholder votes have for years been dominated by large investors, with cross-shareholdings and monosopodic practices leading to a form of regulatory capture. For example, Black Rock often owns large parts of competing companies, and Icahn might well have shares in Xerox. The odd thing is that this is all perfectly legal.
