Glen Schleyer and The Deal Pipeline’s David Marcus discuss how shareholder proxy access is affecting the dynamic between large long-term shareholders and boards of directors.
So, proxy access should exist in the background and its more widespread use would be a “nuisance.”
Why do we expect candidates to debate the issues when it comes to running for public office but challenging corporate directors is seen as a nuisance, unless the company has made egregious missteps?
Those of us at the United States Proxy Exchange believe debate is healthy… even in the context of corporate governance. We don’t just buy shares to speculate; we buy them to own.
Another commentator noted: Sorta like overpriced corporate lawyers are a nuisance. How did we get from the point that shareholders elect directors to the point were they should have no say in who they are voting on? The reason a company is going to be targeted is because of poor performance, poor governance or some combination. Far too many companies (and high paid corporate lawyers) have become detached from the reality of their shareholder base.
Comments are closed.