[michaelmrose]

That a company is obligated to do absolutely anything that will increase revenue is a position often advanced on the internet and never supported.

You cannot have a bonfire and literally burn the companies wealth in your backyard. One may in fact weigh the tangible and non tangible benefits of different courses of actions and make an intelligent decision.

This is covered ably in this article by Cornell

https://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/academics/clarke_business_...

If I may reproduce the most relevant segment.

>Third, corporate directors are not required to maximize shareholder value. As the U.S. Supreme Court recently stated, "modern corporate law does not require for-profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else, and many do not do so." ( BURWELL v. HOBBY LOBBY STORES, INC. ) In nearly all legal jurisdictions, disinterested and informed directors have the discretion to act in what they believe to be the interest of the business corporate entity, even if this differs from maximizing profits for present shareholders. Usually maximizing shareholder value is not a legal obligation, but the product of the pressure that activist shareholders, stock-based compensation schemes and financial markets impose on corporate directors.

Additional reading is linked for the interested.