THE WALL STREET
JOURNAL. |
Business
Business
GM Plans Share Buyback, Averting Proxy Fight
Investor
Harry J. Wilson to drop request to join board in light of
repurchase plan
Harry J. Wilson has criticized GM’s stock price, cash management
and operating performance. PHOTO: BLOOMBERG NEWS |
By
Mike Spector,
Jeff Bennett and
Joann S. Lublin
Updated March 9, 2015 12:31 a.m. ET
General Motors
Co. as soon as Monday will disclose plans to return
billions of dollars to shareholders, a move that is expected to avoid
a potential proxy fight with investor Harry J. Wilson, said people
familiar with the matter.
Mr. Wilson will drop a
previous request to join the Detroit auto maker’s board in light of
the buyback plan, the people said. GM plans to repurchase shares over
time in an amount less than the $8 billion Mr. Wilson previously
proposed, they said. The size of the buyback and its time frame
couldn’t be learned.
Mr. Wilson in February put GM
on notice that he intended to
nominate himself for a board seat at the company’s upcoming annual
meeting and propose an $8 billion stock buyback. Mr. Wilson has
criticized GM’s stock price, cash management and operating
performance.
Mr. Wilson and hedge funds
backing him have held discussions with GM representatives over the
past several weeks, according to people familiar with the matter,
culminating in talks over the weekend that led both sides to reach a
deal that is expected to avoid acrimony, at least in the short term.
GM’s board likely needed
to decide soon whether to put Mr. Wilson in its proxy to have ballot
materials ready before the company’s annual meeting, which could take
place as soon as June. A rejection, or lack of some kind of
settlement, could have led Mr. Wilson to mount a proxy fight.
Mr. Wilson wants GM to
manage its cash better. The auto maker, flush with $25 billion, faces
financial pressures in the months ahead, including a possible hefty
fine from the Justice Department over the company’s failure for more
than a decade to recall vehicles equipped with defective ignition
switches. The auto maker has said it plans to weigh returning cash to
shareholders as soon as the second half of this year. The auto maker
views its plans as responsive to all shareholders and not solely
driven by Mr. Wilson, said a person familiar with the mater.
Last week, Mr. Wilson beat
back criticism over a compensation arrangement with hedge funds that
are backing him related to his possible service on GM’s board. He
could receive anywhere from 2% to 4% of the upside of their GM shares
over three years. Mr. Wilson owns about 30,000 GM shares, while the
funds backing him collectively own more than 30 million, or about 2%
of the shares outstanding.
Mr. Wilson, among the
architects of GM’s 2009 government bailout and bankruptcy
restructuring, last week was criticized by
Warren Buffett , who suggested
the pay arrangement created a short-term incentive. “It’s just not the
way to run a business,” said Mr. Buffett, whose
Berkshire Hathaway Inc. is a GM
shareholder, on CNBC. Mr. Wilson responded that he has held GM stock
since 2011 and expects to for many years, and is willing to lock up
any payouts in GM stock “for an extended period of time.”
Such compensation deals
have sparked controversy at other companies including
Dow Chemical Co. Many company
executives and advisers deride the practice as a “golden leash” that
compromises independence and a director’s duty to serve all
shareholders and weigh the long-term.
Activist investors contend
such payouts motivate their director selections to shake up boardrooms
and increase value for all shareholders.
Mr. Wilson ended up on the
board of
Sotheby’s last year as part of
activist investor
Daniel Loeb ’s settlement with
the auction house for three board seats. Domenico De Sole, lead
independent director at Sotheby’s, bemoaned the proxy fight. “I
thought it was an unfortunate expenditure of money for someone who
turned out to be an exemplary board member,” said Mr. De Sole, a
former Gucci chief executive. He said Mr. Wilson “really knows how to
draw the line between governing and managing” and can work with
executives without overstepping boundaries.
Steve Wolosky, a partner
at law firm Olshan Frome Wolosky LLP who represents activist
investors, says Mr. Wilson’s compensation is justified and his offer
to lock up any payments “clearly evidences his long-term commitment to
improving value at GM.” Mr. Buffett later during the CNBC interview
said: “If Harry has a ton of stock himself that he’s going to put away
for a long period of time, that’s one thing.”
Still, some management
lawyers find Mr. Wilson’s deal problematic.
“I don’t care how long he
locks up the payouts,” said Avrohom J. Kess, a partner at Simpson
Thacher Bartlett LLP. He said Mr. Wilson instead should defer any
payments unless GM’s stock is up a decade from now. “That’s putting
your money where your mouth is.”
The pay agreements are
sometimes fraught but have improved over the years, said Robert
Jackson, a Columbia University Law School professor. The debate over
Mr. Wilson’s arrangement “is a bit of a red herring,” he said, adding
that three-year compensation horizons for directors are “absolutely
standard.”
Write to
Mike Spector at
mike.spector@wsj.com, Jeff
Bennett at
jeff.bennett@wsj.com and Joann S.
Lublin at
joann.lublin@wsj.com
|