Good point - Now as CEO, he has a lot of say- but it is up to board of directors to make the final decision.
Correct ~ And the how much say, is already decided contractually, to which the CEO and Board "agreed" prior.
Point being to crab- If he isn't the one who formed the corporation or CEO or sitting board member -
he has no dog in that hunt. He has no INVESTED interest, financially or contractual agreement to adhere to....anything ~ thus not his business.
Now IF he elects to purchase available "shares" of stock, he does have an interest, but does not have the authorized power to supersede what has been contractually devised and agree to among the CEO and Board.
IF he elects to purchase their products or use their services, dependent upon what the corporation offers....that is his business to dig in his pockets and pay the fees required or not.
But NOT his business to dictate what ANY corporation or business should or shouldn't do, in which he has NO vested interest in.
And NOT his business to dictate what ANY one or business should or shouldn't do with THEIR OWN funds, in which he has NO vested interest in.
And IF he has NO "vested" interest whatsoever ~ his criticism simply becomes, la la la la la, nonsense blowing in the wind.