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

 

 

 

Forum distribution:

Increasing attention to investor costs of obsolete systems for securities records

 

For the court decisions and speech referenced in the article below, see

 

Source: TheStreet, March 3, 2017 article


Laster: Remove the Cobwebs From Stock Record-Keeping

■ Delaware judge takes up antiquated stock record-keeping and voting system in Dole case

 

By David Marcus  |  Mar 3, 2017 6:00 AM EST 

 


Travis Laster has become a forceful advocate for reform of the system for voting corporate stock and tracking share ownership, and in a Feb. 15 decision he confronted yet another drawback of that system. The Delaware vice chancellor presided over a case in which Dole Food Co. agreed to pay stockholders an additional $2.74 a share plus interest to settle claims that the controlling stockholder David Murdock violated his fiduciary duties to minority stockholders in buying Dole for $1.2 billion, or $13.50 a share, in 2013.

There were 36.8 million shares eligible for the settlement, but claimants submitted "facially valid claims" for 49.2 million shares, a discrepancy that the settlement administrator and class counsel could not resolve because the Depository Trust Co. and Cede Co., which keep the stockholder ledger for public companies, did not receive information about trades made in the three trading days before the deal closed on Nov. 1, 2013, a period in which 32 million Dole shares changed hands. Nor could the DTC/Cede system track short sales made in those three days.

There is no cost-effective way to determine who did own the shares at closing, Laster wrote. Instead, he held that the counsel for stockholders, who were led by Stuart Grant of Grant & Eisenhofer PA in Wilmington and Randall Baron of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP should distribute the settlement consideration to Cede and thereby to the custodial banks and brokers whose clients are the economic owners of the shares and let those institutions sort the problem out.

Laster wrote at the end of the opinion that the Dole case raises broader issues: "The problems raised by short sales and trades during the three days before closing appear endemic to the depository system and hence likely infect every claims process. Nothing about either factor was unique to Dole. The only difference was the magnitude of the discrepancy, which made the issues visible."

The judge grappled with another drawback of the current depository system last year when he found that mutual funds sponsored by T. Rowe Price & Associates Inc. could not seek appraisal on the 27 million Dell Inc. shares they owned because the funds had inadvertently voted for the deal, thanks to a clerical error that ended up costing the mutual fund company's investors over $100 million. The error stemmed from the byzantine way in which stock is owned and voted-a "daisy chain," as Laster called it.

He offered a way to untangle the daisy chain in "The Block Chain Plunger: Using Technology to Clean Up Proxy Plumbing and Take Back the Vote," a paper he delivered last fall to the Council of Institutional Investors. Like almost all shareholders, the T. Rowe funds did not own their Dell stock directly. Instead, they were beneficial owners, holding their shares through a custodial bank, State Street Bank & Trust Co., which in turn is a member of the Depository Trust Co., whose nominee Cede was the stockholder of record, as it is for most public companies. State Street in turn used Broadridge Financial Solutions Inc. to collect and implement voting instructions from account holders. Laster noted in his speech that Broadridge "controls over 98% of the U.S. market for proxy vote processing services." T. Rowe added yet another intermediary, since it uses Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. to notify its funds about upcoming votes, provide voting recommendations, collect voting instructions and deliver them to Broadridge.

Laster argued in his speech that the contorted way in which shares are held and voted makes precise vote counting impossible. He noted that one prominent Wilmington lawyer estimated that in a corporate election closer than 55% to 45%, "There is no verifiable answer to the question, 'Who won?'"

Many lawyers have also warned that the number of shares on which appraisal could be sought is theoretically infinite because of the oddities of the DTC/Cede system, but those fears had never been borne out until the Dole case, which gives Laster one more powerful example to argue for a much-needed reform of the system.

 


© 1996-2017 TheStreet, Inc.

 

 

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.