Forum Home Page [see Broadridge note below]

 The Shareholder ForumTM`

Fair Investor Access

See related case examples of

Dell Inc.

appraisal rights for intrinsic value realization

and

Walgreen Co.

stock buyback policies

"Fair Access" Home Page

"Fair Access" Program Reference

For graphs of specific company and related industry returns, see

Returns on Corporate Capital

For graphs of specific company voting for the past 5 years, see

Shareholder Support Rankings

 

 

 

 

Source: The Wall Street Journal | CFO Journal: October 1, 2013 article

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL.


CFO Journal.


October 1, 2013, 1:20 AM ET

Activist Investors Go Big


 

By Maxwell Murphy and Emily Chasan

CFO Report Editor, WSJ Pro

Big companies sitting on piles of cash or shelling it out to their executives better beware: activist investors are targeting you.

This year, 60% of activists’ campaigns have focused on getting companies to boost returns or shake up their board. A record 30% of the campaigns have been aimed at big companies, almost double the average over the like period for the past four years, according to FactSet SharkWatch. The data provider defines large companies as those whose market value exceeds $1 billion.

“If there’s a lot of cash on your balance sheet, the argument is you’re not getting an adequate return on cash, and you need to do buybacks or dividends,” said Alex Khutorsky, managing director at Valence Group, a New York investment bank. Mr. Khutorsky said he is getting lots of calls from companies for advice on defensive strategies.

Forty-one activist campaigns this year have demanded that companies return cash to shareholders via dividends or buybacks, up more than 50% from a year earlier, according to SharkWatch. Skittishness about the economy and the lack of political harmony in Washington have prompted companies to sit on near-record cash troves, totaling more than $1.8 trillion, according to Federal Reserve data.

 

Investors say that conditions for activism are the ripest in years. Fund managers have amassed their own cash reserves, fueled by rising stock prices, and can borrow at low interest rates if they want to build influential stakes in companies. They also are taking off the kid gloves. Proxy fights are at a five-year peak, with most of them focused on booting out directors.

“People are starting to realize that no one is safe,” Mr. Khutorsky said, adding, “Companies are thinking through their vulnerabilities.”

Many companies have quelled activist-led rebellions by distributing cash through dividends and share repurchases. Of the companies in the S&P 500 index, 83% are offering cash dividends, the most since the late 1990s, according to FactSet. Altogether they doled out $329 billion during the year ended in July, double the amount 10 years earlier. Buybacks, meanwhile, spiked to $122.8 billion between May and July, the highest level for a fiscal quarter in nearly two years.

Companies aren’t thrilled to have an activist knock on their door, because proxy battles can be costly. Earlier this year, OshKosh Corp. said billionaire Carl Icahn‘s failed effort to shake up its board and acquire control of the specialty-vehicle maker cost the company more than $16.3 million, or 11 cents a share.

Time, too, is money. Activists “can just suck the living daylights out of management,” said Michael Smiley, chief financial officer of Zebra Technologies Corp. and a director of Twin Disc Inc., a power-transmission equipment maker. In 2007, one of the most-active years for shareholder revolts against small companies, Twin Disc was targeted by activists who wanted it to put itself up for sale, but the activists failed to win wide support.

Managers can easily become consumed by their discussions with activists, Mr. Smiley said, spending days preparing with lawyers and advisers, while also having to update the board and oversee daily operations.

Of course, shareholders’ suggestions can be valuable. “Sometimes they have good ideas that help address some of the sacred cows companies have,” he added.

Between 1994 and 2007, companies targeted by activist hedge funds experienced, on average, an initial 6% rise in their stock price and improved their performance against peers by about two-thirds, according to a study by Lucian Bebchuk, director of the corporate-governance program at Harvard Law School.

“People would be amazed at how poorly some companies are run,” Mr. Icahn says of public companies generally, adding that “in many ways corporate governance is worse than it was 20 years ago.”

Over the past two years, Apple Inc. has assuaged some activists with its dividend and buyback programs. But in August, Mr. Icahn disclosed a “large position” in the still cash-rich gadget maker. More recently he tweeted that he was to meet with Apple CEO Tim Cook to discuss the “magnitude of its share-repurchase program.”

Last week, CtW Investment Group sent a letter to the chairman of Oracle Corp.'s compensation committee, threatening to vote against Oracle’s pay practices, and possibly against directors who sit on the committee, if Oracle doesn’t make changes that include limiting stock-option-based awards to executives.

Oracle has said changes in its pay practices aren’t warranted.

Copyright ©2013 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

 

 

This Forum program is open, free of charge, to anyone concerned with investor interests in the development of marketplace standards for expanded access to information for securities valuation and shareholder voting decisions. As stated in the posted Conditions of Participation, the Forum's purpose is to provide decision-makers with access to information and a free exchange of views on the issues presented in the program's Forum Summary. Each participant is expected to make independent use of information obtained through the Forum, subject to the privacy rights of other participants.  It is a Forum rule that participants will not be identified or quoted without their explicit permission.

This Forum program was initiated to address issues and objectives defined by participants in the 2010 "E-Meetings" program relevant to broad public interests in marketplace practices, rather than investor decisions relating to only a single company. The Forum may therefore invite program support of several companies that can provide both expertise and examples of leadership relating to the issues being addressed.

Inquiries about this Forum program and requests to be included in its distribution list may be addressed to access@shareholderforum.com.

The information provided to Forum participants is intended for their private reference, and permission has not been granted for the republishing of any copyrighted material. The material presented on this web site is the responsibility of Gary Lutin, as chairman of the Shareholder Forum.

Shareholder Forum™ is a trademark owned by The Shareholder Forum, Inc., for the programs conducted since 1999 to support investor access to decision-making information. It should be noted that we have no responsibility for the services that Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc., introduced for review in the Forum's 2010 "E-Meetings" program and has since been offering with the “Shareholder Forum” name, and we have asked Broadridge to use a different name that does not suggest our support or endorsement.