I think it’s okay to say “vulturism” is bad. Even immoral. That it shouldn’t happen. Okay. So now what? I’m willing to go this far but I’ll probably step off this train just before we get to government solutions.
I've seen companies do the exact same thing from the inside out. International Harvester used to be a manufacturing giant, making everything from trucks to tractors. When sales slumped, management had the bright idea (which was being taught at Harvard and other Ivy League schools at the time) to sell off capitol in order to keep up cash. Cash being a major indicator of a company's "health." Well, when you sell the stuff you use to make stuff, you can't make as much stuff (did I get that right?). Thus the inevitable decline to the point where they were ready to call it quits in the '90s. They were down to the engine and OTR truck business. Everything else was gone. Acres of factory floor space empty.
Even the vultures didn't want it. They couldn't liquidate enough equipment to make the purchase worth their time and effort.
Same story with Chrysler. They did things so poorly that even Cerberus (guardian of the underworld and liquidator of assets), didn't want them and sold it off to FIAT for a tidy sum thanks to good old Uncle Sugar stepping in and sweetening the pot.
Running a company badly isn't a crime, which is what all of this boils down to.
No it is not. Your examples are different. Mistakes and poor management are not what we are discussing.
Cabelas was profitable until a minority 15% shareholder threatened the other investors stakes if they did not force the board to sell the company. This leverage upended a profitable company, consumers lost a retailer, employees lost jobs, government lost tax revenues, all so less than a handful could make a killing. Which is exactly what it was. It is not a legal crime but stoping the incentives to do this type of thing a being discussed...
What do you mean "threatened other investors stakes?"
He got a significant enough stake, 11%, that he could start a costly fight trying to get the board to sell. Though profitable, that fight would have drained resources and cash possibly taking the company down. Rather than fight, they sold. Other share holders could have been thrilled with the direction the company was headed but once this happened the prudent path is to side with the raider and get out.