????如果真是這種情況，邁克?戴爾就應該做兩件事：承認自己的敏感是此次收購的主要動因，然后辭職。這樣，他就能消除從股東手中收購業務必然帶來的矛盾沖突，畢竟對這些股東來說，他算是一個受托經營者。

????如果股東們批準了本次收購，邁克?戴爾就得重新披掛上陣，當首席執行官（很可能就是替換掉那個蒙他推舉的臨時掌門人）。如果股東們否決了本次收購，那就會選出一個永久繼任者。不管怎么說，邁克?戴爾都不想再當一個上市公司的首席執行官了。

????或者還有可能，他確實發現了大把商業機會，戴爾作為一家私營企業要比作為上市公司更有可能利用好這些機會。如果邁克?戴爾真想對這些機會大把投資，那他至少應該發表一封致股東的公開信，好好說說。

????想象一下，某天你來到一家電子商品零售店想買一臺筆記本電腦。促銷員給你看了兩臺展示的型號。但當你想了解更多信息，比如為什么這臺比那臺貴時，他卻自顧自走開了。

????這就是現在邁克?戴爾對股東干的事——要求他們做出重大決定，卻不給他們必要信息。作為他們的受托管理人，他欠他們的其實還很多。所以，要么開口說話，要么掛靴走人吧。

????譯者：清遠

????If that is the case, then Michael Dell should do two things: Acknowledge this sensitivity as a fundamental driver of the buyout, and then resign. By doing so, he would eliminate the conflict inherent in trying to buy a business from shareholders for whom you serve as a fiduciary.

????In the case that shareholders approve the buyout, then Michael Dell would reinstall himself as CEO (likely replacing an interim chief chosen with his blessing). If shareholders reject the buyout, then a permanent successor would be chosen. After all, Michael Dell doesn't want to be CEO of a public company anyway.

????Or perhaps he really does see accretive business opportunities that Dell is more likely to capitalize on as a private company than as a public one. If Michael Dell is willing to risk billions of dollars on the existence of such prospects, then he should at least be able to lay them out in broad strokes via a shareholder letter.

????Imagine for a moment that you walk into an electronics retailer, in order to purchase a new laptop. The salesman shows you two floor models. But when you seek more information, such as why one is more expensive than the other, the salesman just walks away.

????That is what Michael Dell is doing to his shareholders – asking them to make a major decision without first giving them the necessary information. As their fiduciary, he owes them more than that. Talk or quit.