自从戴尔公司（Dell）1月宣布它将接受公司创始人兼首席执行官迈克•戴尔244亿美元的收购要约后，很多人已就此事发表了高见。公司两个最大的外部股东已站出来反对该收购，称每股13.65美元的价格“与合理价格相去太远”。一些没有介入此事的私募股权公司高管则对小股东银湖合伙基金（Silver Lake Partners）帮助达成此项交易赞誉有加，并预测它将帮助江河日下的戴尔重振旗鼓。

    但在一片纷扰中，唯一的一位我们很少听到声音的人却是迈克•戴尔本人。除了在官方声明中做过一些腼腆的表态外，这位公司的首席执行官早已淡出了公众视线。这种状况亟需改变。

    迈克•戴尔应该向股东作出解释，为什么长期来看，如果本次收购被拒，戴尔的股票不会高于每股13.65美元。同时，最重要的一点是，他应该向大家说明，为什么戴尔成为一家私有公司后，它的股价最终会超过13.65美元（这是迈克•戴尔必须坚信的一点，除非他是有史以来第一个费劲九牛二虎之力，只是要把公司做得不赚不赔的收购者）。

    通常一家公司被私有化后，管理层往往会发生变动。但在这桩交易中不会发生这种情况，因为银湖合伙基金就算想赶走迈克•戴尔（另一家原本打算出价的公司就是因此才望而却步），它也没有这样的实力。

    所以不管怎么说，迈克•戴尔还是执掌大局的人。私有化之后，上市公司所不能做的哪些事情就可以开绿灯了呢？

    这是一个非常严肃的问题。因为从理论观点看，这个问题的答案似乎是绝不能为所欲为。许多上市公司的首席执行官会制定长期战略规划，并告诉华尔街，他们有信心达成市场的季度预期。比如亚马逊公司（Amazon）的杰夫•贝索斯和彭尼公司（J.C. Penney）的罗恩•约翰逊。实际上，法律规定，上市公司不得发布季报指南，也不能召开分析师电话会议。对这类公司的首席执行官来说，如果他们能把时间更好地用在如何管好业务上，也就不需要经常和对冲基金或共同基金经理碰头。

    再者，戴尔的财务业绩还是属于上市公司范畴——这是该公司积累的可交易债券的副产品。迈克•戴尔还对董事会表示，不管是哪家私募基金公司，只要愿意出最高价，他就愿意与之合作。所以，现在对他来说，要说明为什么最后选了银湖也是个难题。

    也有人认为，迈克•戴尔之所以想把戴尔私有化，与其说和战略有关，不如说和他的个性有关。他的脸皮比贝索斯和约翰逊都薄，所以在上市公司里没法如鱼得水。

    Ever since Dell Inc. announced in January that it had accepted a $24.4 billion buyout offer from founder and CEO Michael Dell, plenty of people have voiced their opinions. The company's two largest outside shareholders have come out in opposition, calling the $13.65 per share price "completely out of proportion to what's reasonable." Some uninvolved private equity executives have lauded minority investor Silver Lake Partners for helping to put the deal together, and predicted that it will help revive the company's flagging fortunes.

    The one person we really haven't heard much from, however, is Michael Dell himself. Save for a few milquetoast statements in the official announcement, the company's CEO has been absent from the public eye. This needs to change.

    Michael Dell should explain to shareholders why Dell (DELL) stock won't be worth more than $13.65 per share, in the long term, if the buyout offer is rejected. And, part and parcel, he should explain why Dell stock eventually will be worth more than $13.65 per share as a private company (something Michael Dell must believe, unless he is the first acquirer in history who strives to break even).

    Often when a company is taken private, the transition is accompanied by a management change. But that won't be the case here, as Silver Lake Partners wouldn't have enough clout to fire Michael Dell if it wanted to (something that scared off another potential bidder).

    So Michael Dell is in charge either way. What will being private enable him to do that being public precludes?

    This is a very serious question because, from a theoretical perspective, the answer would seem to be nothing. Plenty of public company CEOs set out long-term strategic plans, and tell Wall Street that they do not worry much about meeting quarterly expectations. Examples include Jeff Bezos of Amazon (AMZN) and Ron Johnson of J.C. Penney (JCP). In fact, public companies aren't even legally required to issue quarterly guidance or hold analyst calls. And their CEOs needn't meet regularly with hedge fund or mutual fund managers, if their time could be better spent running the business.

    Moreover, Dell's financial results will remain in the public domain – a byproduct of all of the tradable debt it is accumulating. Michael Dell also told Dell's board that he would partner with whatever private equity firm was willing to pay the highest price, so it would be difficult for him to argue that the differentiator is Silver Lake.

    Some have suggested that Michael Dell's desire to take Dell private is more about personality than it is about strategy. His skin is thinner than that of a Bezos or Johnson, and thus cannot perform as effectively in a public company.