Tag Archives | Gary Lutin

Virtual-Only Meeting Growth

Virtual-Only Meetings: The Nuclear Option

Virtual-Only Meetings are quickly being adopted by entrenched boards who fear both adverse publicity and any attempt by shareholders, especially retail shareholders, to hold them accountable. Broadridge Financial Solutions ($BR) has a direct financial incentive to push companies toward virtual-only meetings. Although many funds and organizations oppose such meetings, no one in the opposition has a […]

Continue Reading ·
Mr. Peabodys WayBackMachine

Wayback: Five, Ten and Fifteen Years Ago in Corporate Governance

Mr. Peabody and Sherman prepare to go back in time to visit corpgov.net 5, 10 and 15 years ago. Five years ago in Corporate Governance In the year-end reflections two contributing factors deserve more attention. First, “prophetic warnings” from religious groups on the dangers of subprime loans via shareowner resolutions. Second, a call from Sanford […]

Continue Reading ·

Symantec Audio-Only Meeting Gets National Coverage

At last, there have been a couple of articles in the national press on the Symantec Corp. virtual-only meeting. First, Ross Kerber reported for Reuters, Shareholder meetings via Web mute dissident voices (9/24/2010) Kerber observed, Soon movies might be the only place to hear pointed outbursts from investors. This year more than a dozen companies […]

Continue Reading ·

Apache v Chevedden: More Comments

Gary Lutin was kind enough to forward some additional comments on this case from a few of his Forum participants. Two of them are noteworthy and were not discussed in my prior post on this case. I found Clearfield’s statement straightforward by Nelson’s more puzzling. Andrew M. Clearfield, CEO of Investment Initiatives, LLC, formerly Managing […]

Continue Reading ·

Apache Files Slapp Suit: More Support for DRS

As reported in Risk & Governance Blog (1/13/10), theCorporateCounsel.net Blog (1/13/10), GlobalProxyWatch (1/15/10), and by Gary Lutin via e-mail (1/15/10), Houston-based Apache has sued shareowner activist John Chevedden, contending that he failed to meet the proof-of-ownership requirements in SEC Rule 14a-8(b) required to submit a resolution. See Apache v Chevedden. Chevedden provided documentation of his ownership but […]

Continue Reading ·

Archives: November 2008

Noteworthy What Will TARP Bring? (RMG, 11/24/08), see especially comments from Connecticut State Treasurer Denise Nappier Issues to Consider: Special Meetings to Authorize TARP Preferred Stock(TheCorporateCounsel.net Blog, 11/25/08). Most companies don’t have the authority to issue preferred shares under their charter and are scrambling to file preliminary proxy materials for a special meeting to obtain shareholder […]

Continue Reading ·

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes