Tag Archives | Apple
The Apple 2019 annual meeting is March 1st. To enhance long-term shareholder value, vote AGAINST directors Levinson and Gore., as well as pay and the auditor. Vote FOR shareholder proposal #4 Proxy Access Amendments and against #5, which aims to set up an ideological litmus test for directors. Continue Reading →
Apple Inc. (AAPL) designs, manufactures, and markets mobile communication and media devices, and personal computers to consumers, and small and mid-sized businesses; and education, enterprise, and government customers worldwide. The company also sells related software, services, accessories, networking solutions, and third-party digital content and applications.
The annual meeting is coming up on February 13, 2018 at the new Apple Park. I voted with the Board’s recommendations 69% of the time. I voted against the pay package. I voted for proxy access amendments and for a human rights committee. View Proxy Statement via SEC’s EDGAR system (look for DEF 14A). Continue Reading →
Apple again invokes the ‘ordinary business’ exclusion roadmap provided by SEC Staff Legal Bulletin 14I (SLB 14I) in an attempt to muzzle shareholders. In the face of mounting evidence of inevitable manmade climate change and with the recognition that society has increasingly limited possibilities of mitigating the worst outcome for future generations, Jantz Management LLC submitted a shareholder proposal to Apple, Inc. asking the company to report on the feasibility of achieving net zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, including Apple’s manufacturing GHG emissions, by a target date of 2030, 2040, or 2050.
Similar to a proposal submitted by Jing Zhao, requesting that Apple establish a Human Rights Committee (see no-action request), the company did not engage in dialogue with the shareholder, but responded by invoking the ordinary business exemption under rule 14a-8(i)(7), asking the SEC to allow the company to omit the Continue Reading →
Apple Inc. (NASD:AAPL) designs, manufactures, and markets mobile communication and media devices, personal computers, and portable digital music players to consumers, small and mid-sized businesses, and education, enterprise, and government customers worldwide.
Yesterday, several reporters asked me to comment on no-action requests and the SEC’s denial to Apple, as well as the Business Roundtable’s fanciful notions regarding the need for reform of the proxy proposal process. I am reluctant to give the Business Roundtable’s proposal, Modernizing the Shareholder Proposal Process, any more ink but will just touch on one of their issues here as I explain the Apple decision.
No-Action Requests: Apple and Proxy Access Lite
The SEC has consistently denied no-action requests to companies where the proponent asks for modifications to bylaws when the companies have made no modifications in the direction requested. See H&R Block and Microsoft as prior examples. Apple is no exception. This is nothing new. Continue Reading →
Apple shareholders rejected real proxy access at their meeting on February 25, 2016. Maybe shareholders thought they already have it. Recent decisions by the SEC could lead shareholders to believe proxy access was “substantially implemented.”
Maybe they wanted to support Apple’s management while the company is under attack from the FBI.
ISS recommended a “For” vote. Shouldn’t that have guaranteed passage?
We probably won’t know for months which Apple shareholders rejected real proxy access… and maybe that’s the key point.
Apple Inc. (AAPL) meeting on 2/26/2016 provides shareholders an opportunity to vote FOR real proxy access. Apple Inc. designs, manufactures, and markets mobile communication and media devices, personal computers, and portable digital music players to consumers, small and mid-sized businesses, education, and enterprise and government customers worldwide. It is one of the stocks in my portfolio. I will attend the 2/26 meeting in person.
ProxyDemocracy.org had collected the votes of four funds when I checked. I voted against two directors and for proxy access, therefore with the Board’s recommendations 47% of the time. View Proxy Statement.
The passing US proxy season made lots of business headlines as the most turbulent ever (which I’ve found happens every year). But 2015 was still notable for the flood of activist initiatives targeting company boards of directors. Activists sought “no” votes on directors who set executive pay, or said no to stock buyback, dividend, or spinoff plans. They nominated their own candidates for board seats, sometimes even whole board slates. They generally caused a ruckus. Continue Reading →
My wife and I don’t have the resources to or stock holdings to allow us to file 75 proxy access shareholder proposals, like New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer’s Boardroom Accountability Project. However, I have been writing about proxy access for 20 years and, together with Les Greenberg, filed the petition in 2002 with the SEC that many have credited with renewing interest in the subject. We hope our efforts, although small, contribute to making companies more democratic and profitable. Continue Reading →
The Walt Disney Company $DIS will hold their annual meeting tomorrow (3/12/2014). Today is the last day to vote unless you attend the meeting. My voting recommendations are at The Walt Disney Company (DIS): Proxy Score 79.
Since that post a few additional funds have voted and there has been further debate: Continue Reading →
Update: Preliminary voting results indicate that our proxy access proposal got 39% of the vote. Yes, the proposal could have been worded to more closely conform to the Rule 14a-11 standards. Hopefully, Apple got the message and will propose a “best practices” revision of their articles and bylaws as needed for the 2016 annual meeting. If not, we’ll be back at that meeting with our own proxy access proposal.
Update: ISS recommends its clients vote in support of proxy access, calling the proposed eligibility requirements of my proposal at Apple robust, while safeguarding against abuses in the nominating process. Glass Lewis opposes the proposal because “given the company’s… positive financial performance, we do not believe that adoption of this proposal is necessary at this time.”
So, the tool you’ll need when the company is in trouble, you’re supposed to wait until the company is already in trouble to put that in place, according to Glass Lewis… then you wait again until you can make nominations? That’s like waiting until a building is on fire to install a sprinkling system. Apache is the latest company to support proxy access. That company, which sued retail shareowner John Chevedden rather than allow shareholders to vote to eliminate supermajority requirements, seems to have a better grasp of when proxy access is needed than proxy advisor Glass Lewis.
The C$238.8 billion ($189.4 billion) Toronto-based CPPIB and the $182.2 billion FSBA both plan to vote in support of a shareholder proposal calling for proxy access, enabling shareholders to use corporate proxy materials to nominate up to 25% of the board. CalSTRS ($186 billion) voted for proxy access, using the Glass Lewis voting platform. Continue Reading →
Apple Inc. (NASD:AAPL) is one of the stocks in my portfolio. Their annual meeting is coming up on 2/28/2014. ProxyDemocracy.org was down for maintenance when I checked and voted on 2/19/2014, so no voting advice there. I checked a few other sources such as CalPERS, Florida SBA and OTPP but none had disclosed their votes on their sites as of yesterday. I voted with 89% of the Board’s recommendations. View Apple’s Proxy Statement. Continue Reading →
The Rock Center for Corporate Governance and the NACD Northern California Chapter hosted a conversation between Professor Joe Grundfest and dragon slayer Anne Simpson, Director of Corporate Governance at CalPERS, about how Apple and CalPERS ended up on the same side in a shareholder activism showdown. Continue Reading →
Despite the Apple Board’s best effort to obtain a “no-action” letter to exclude my proxy access proposal, it is included among the items to be voted on at or before the annual meeting to be held on February 28 at our Company’s principal executive offices in Cupertino, CA. See Apple’s proxy, Proxy Proposal 11, ‘Proxy Access for Shareholders’ on page 63. (A minor gripe – why doesn’t Apple provide a linked index to our proxy so that shareholders can easily flip to the subject they are looking for? Let’s hope part of their strategy isn’t making it too hard to analyze the issues and vote.)
Here’s the thrust of my argument. We need directors who can address the big money pile – not with short-term buyback strategies that facilitate extraction of value but with long-term strategies that create value. Investing $150B in Treasuries or money markets is not efficient use of our money. The returns of Google Ventures, for example, are far above the industry’s mean. There is no reason why Apple couldn’t also put our money to good use though an Apple Ventures type of vehicle or through a revamped and enhanced Blue Sky program. Continue Reading →
I have a ‘no-action’ request by Apple on my desk. They are fighting my attempt to include consideration of a proxy access proposal at their next annual meeting. Like most no-action requests to the SEC, this one is full of dry uninspired attempts to raise procedural minutiae as a basis for exclusion. Also sitting on my desk is the latest issue of Directors&Boards with the following sentence in huge type on the cover: Should You Serve on an Activist’s Slate?”
That looks a lot more interesting. Apple can wait. Won’t it be nice, I think, when boards welcome proxy access, the new ideas and candidates that are likely to follow? Let’s see what they have to say at Directors&Boards. Continue Reading →
Apple ($AAPL) is one of the stocks in my portfolio. Their annual meeting is coming up on 2/27/2013. ProxyDemocracy.org had collected the votes of five funds when I checked on 2/19/2012. They listed the votes of six funds voting as of yesterday. I voted with management 46% of the time. View Proxy Statement. I voted, despite David Einhorn’s attempt to get an injunction to block the vote on “Proposal 2” in Apple’s proxy statement, which would abolish a system for issuing preferred stock at its discretion, facilitate majority voting in director elections and establish a par value for the company’s common stock. Continue Reading →
Watch the Bloomberg Businessweek discussion and get an update on the EU debate on female representation in boardrooms. Interview of experts also includes insights on women added value in Continue Reading →
The preliminary vote gave my “say on directors pay” less than 4%, so I guess putting that proposal up at the world’s largest most profitable company with so many happy shareowners may have been a mistake. However, I note that Apple cut the pay of a couple of directors from $1.2 million to about half that, so maybe my Continue Reading →
Apple (AAPL) is one of the stocks in my portfolio. Their annual meeting is coming up on February 23, 2012 (Thursday). This is one meeting I’ll be attending in person, both to vote and to move my motion to provide shareowners with a “say on directors pay.”
Looking for work-life balance? Work from home (at least part of the time). Set your own pay — $1,000 per hour and up. No threat of layoffs or workforce cutbacks. Part-time hours and multiple positions available. Excellent way to supplement your retirement income. No application necessary…
The term “chemistry,” or your ability to work collegially with the other members, is often used in board searches, and it can make or Continue Reading →
My say on director pay will be on the Apple proxy (embedded links added):
6 – Shareholder Say on Director Pay
Resolved: Shareholders request that our Board of Directors adopt a policy that provides shareholders the opportunity, at each annual meeting, to vote on an advisory proposal, prepared by the Board of Directors, to ratify the pay given members of our Board of Directors as disclosed in the proxy Continue Reading →
Apple tasted defeat at its annual meeting yesterday when CalPERSs, the California pension fund, saw its resolution in favor of majority voting for directors passed by shareholders. (Apple Loses Investor Vote, 2/24/2011)
At Apple’s annual meeting on Wednesday, about 74 percent of votes cast favored a proposal by Calpers that unopposed candidates for the company’s board receive a majority of votes to win election, according to the fund. (Apple succession call nixed, board rule OK’d | Reuters, 2/23/2011)
There was never any question in voting my shares of Apple. Egan-Jones Proxy Services, Glass, Lewis & Co. LLC, and ISS Proxy Advisory Services all endorsed a majority vote election standard proposed by CalPERS for unopposed board candidates. Who wouldn’t? If shareowners can’t make the nominations, they should at least be able to turn out directors who fail to represent us. The management of Apple insists that one vote in favor of a director should be enough to get elected. That doesn’t seem reasonable to me.
I also voted in favor of the Laborers’ International Union’s measure to have directors issue an annual report on CEO succession planning. Certainly, with Jobs getting a liver transplant in 2009 and talking another medical leave, it is high time the Apple board gave serious thought to succession plans.
Ten resolutions on succession planning have been submitted so far this proxy season and I’ll be supporting all I can vote for. I’m a little surprised to see only CalPERS reporting out their votes on Apple at ProxyDemocracy.org. CalPERS also reported their votes on their site, the first of at least 300 this proxy season. If we’re lucky, maybe they’ll start reporting in advance for all their proxy votes.