Sorry, but I don't see how that is a translation?
Let's say I own a shop, and a customer walks in just as I am about to close, I say to the customer "It is not convenient for you to be here" - because I want to close my shop. Saying something like "It is not in your best interest to be here", sounds like a threat, or a very loaded statement at the least.
The correct translation is a sentence about the situation, which is inconvenient. Your version suddenly makes it about the person, and what is or is not in their best interests. They are not at all the same thing.
The Spanish sentence is neutral, "conviene" means "it is convenient". The "it" refers to the situation, so the sentence gives a neutral point of view, which introduces some ambiguity. One might then ask, "Not convenient for who?".
The point is that the Spanish sentence does not say who, so nor should the English translation - and "best interest" appears nowhere.
I don´t know why there´s no reply link on your post, xtempore, so I´ll post here. I´m not arguing that ¨te¨ is not an indirect object pronoun; that´s the point. I am saying that the Spanish sentence is not ambiguous. The ENGLISH sentence is ambiguous, but the ¨te¨ in the Spanish sentence has a clearer meaning.
@ xtempore. Aren't we going in circles? I agree that the given translation is the most literal one and correct. On the other hand I ask myself why somebody says to me that is is not convenient for me to be somewhere. That would be something I know by myself, so I don't need telling. That is why I looked for another translation. In this case "best interest" etc. Perhaps you can suggest a better translation. Thanks.