Like literally they have no choice as directors legally need to do everything they can to drive shareholder value, not customer value.
This is not accurate. While there are laws protecting shareholders from malfeasance like deliberately reducing share value, it is not meant to mean (nor have there ever been cases brought) by shareholders for companies not doing enough to drive shares.
Did anyone make it all the way thru this? Does any of it match reality? Is it a bit? I honestly cannot tell