如果真是这种情况，迈克•戴尔就应该做两件事：承认自己的敏感是此次收购的主要动因，然后辞职。这样，他就能消除从股东手中收购业务必然带来的矛盾冲突，毕竟对这些股东来说，他算是一个受托经营者。

    如果股东们批准了本次收购，迈克•戴尔就得重新披挂上阵，当首席执行官（很可能就是替换掉那个蒙他推举的临时掌门人）。如果股东们否决了本次收购，那就会选出一个永久继任者。不管怎么说，迈克•戴尔都不想再当一个上市公司的首席执行官了。

    或者还有可能，他确实发现了大把商业机会，戴尔作为一家私营企业要比作为上市公司更有可能利用好这些机会。如果迈克•戴尔真想对这些机会大把投资，那他至少应该发表一封致股东的公开信，好好说说。

    想象一下，某天你来到一家电子商品零售店想买一台笔记本电脑。促销员给你看了两台展示的型号。但当你想了解更多信息，比如为什么这台比那台贵时，他却自顾自走开了。

    这就是现在迈克•戴尔对股东干的事——要求他们做出重大决定，却不给他们必要信息。作为他们的受托管理人，他欠他们的其实还很多。所以，要么开口说话，要么挂靴走人吧。

    译者：清远

    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.