This whole charade of long-term investors having more rights and privileges than short-term investors bothers activist investors. We bring constructive ideas to our portfolio companies regardless of the holding period. We resent deeply the accusation that we want only to cripple companies through clever, narrow, and ultimately short-sighted tactical maneuvers. 

Earlier, we considered the evidence about whether activist investors adopt that dreaded short-term thinking. We showed how investors use the proceeds from share repurchases to invest in speculative R&D and other long-term ideas. We have three arguments that refute the long- and short-term canard:

• Use of share repurchase proceeds
• Comparable holding periods to mutual funds
• Positive long-term impact on portfolio companies. 

No evidence shows activist investors think too short-term, or more short-term than any other investors, and that this alleged short-term thinking hurts companies. 

In our current blog post, we now put to rest the very idea behind the distinction. We show it makes no sense to distinguish between short- and long-term investors, and its proponents use it mainly to entrench CEOs and BoDs.