That means Starboard Value won't be seeking election at this June's shareholder meeting unless either Starboard or Yahoo! hasn't disclosed something yet, but that would be unlikely.
Why might Starboard choose not to run a full or partial slate? The most likely answer is it they didn't think it could win.
The biggest problem Starboard would likely face in its campaign to win board representation would be institutional shareholders who might say "I've owned Yahoo! stock for a while and it's gone from $15 to $44 since Marissa Mayer arrived, so what's the problem?"
That's basically the argument TheStreet's Jim Cramer has made on CNBC many times, and it's representative of a point of view that others would share.
My answer to this -- and I believe Starboard has said similar things -- is this growth in Yahoo!'s stock price is 100% attributable to Alibaba's (BABA - Get Report) growth in value over this period. When Alibaba's stock dropped from $120 in November to the $80s now, it took down Yahoo!'s stock with it. Yahoo!'s stock didn't drop because the company had a bad quarter.
The value of the part of Yahoo! Marissa Mayer has direct control over during her tenure has likely decreased in value in the last three years. It's probably gone from a zero valuation to a negative $2 billion or $3 billion. That's absurd, of course, but it's likely accurate.
However, that's a tough case to make. Cramer and others would likely respond by saying that's crazy because it's too hypothetical and you can simply look and see the stock price is up. All clear on the Yahoo! front!
My guess is there was too much of this type of thinking among Yahoo!'s shareholder base to get Starboard convinced it would be successful.
So all eyes are now on Marissa Mayer to perform. The board announced Thursday it had expanded the buyback plan to $2 billion. There might be more announcements in a few weeks on the next Yahoo! earnings call.
If the core business continues to struggle or even decline further, expect more pressure to rise on Mayer.
Two bad quarters in a row would likely spark some very tough questions.
Editor's Note: This article was originally published at 11 a.m. EDT on Real Money on April 1.