Forum Home Page [see Broadridge note below]

 The Shareholder ForumTM`

Fair Investor Access

This public program was initiated in collaboration with The Conference Board Task Force on Corporate/Investor Engagement and with Thomson Reuters support of communication technologies. The Forum is providing continuing reports of the issues that concern this program's participants, as summarized  in the January 5, 2015 Forum Report of Conclusions.

"Fair Access" Home Page

"Fair Access" Program Reference


Related Projects 2012-2019

For graphed analyses of company and related industry returns, see

Returns on Corporate Capital

See also analyses of

Shareholder Support Rankings


Forum distribution:

Professional views of activist fund's pioneering support of a social issue selected to attract potential investors and allies


For a copy of the Jana-CalSTRS open letter published on Saturday, January 6, 2018, referenced below, click here.

Note: The following analysis was published later the same morning in a newsletter for activist and defense professionals:


Source: TheStreet, January 12, 2018 article


With Apple Campaign, Activist Jana Partners Polishes Its Brand

The activist fund has traditionally focused its energy on share price improvement and M&A. Now it has a social impact fund with a different kind of campaign at the iPhone giant.

By Ronald Orol 

Jan 12, 2018 9:19 AM EST

Activist fund Jana Partners and a giant California public pension fund launched a new kind of activist campaign over the weekend, joining forces to urge Apple Inc. (AAPL) to take action to curb smartphone addiction among children.

The campaign, which sets up a special impact fund for the campaign, represented an unusual shift for the activist investment firm headed by Barry Rosenstein, who typically targets corporations with efforts seeking to improve their share price through operational changes or M&A.

Jana and its partner, the California State Teachers' Retirement System, issued a letter Saturday full of statistics and data about child overuse of iPhones and their impact on sleep, depression, and risk of suicide. The effort should be lauded. But is there a bigger picture beyond protecting children? Yes. The investment will almost certainly help Rosenstein as he seeks capital allocations from public pension funds for his traditional activist fund and its more aggressive, less friendly agitations. For example, the campaign is likely to help Jana maintain a strong relationship with CalSTRS, its partner in the Apple effort.

Also, it could help Jana Partners gain support for its campaigns in the form of the votes of big institutional investors, whether they have the fund's back in behind-the-scenes negotiations or public boardroom battles.

The campaign fits squarely within the category of environmental, social and governance activism, or ESG, an investing category that sizeable public pension funds such as CalSTRS as well as the primary index funds, including Vanguard Group, State Street, and BlackRock, are concentrating on heavily.

Shane Goodwin, chief of the Columbia Law School shareholder activism research project, suggests that the new Apple campaign indicates that Jana Partners is motivated in part by seeking to get on the good side of index funds, who are often the largest investors at corporations targeted by activists. "These index funds are very focused on ESG for the 2018 proxy season," Goodwin said. "You [activist] need the top three index funds if you are going to win your campaign. Is Barry [Rosenstein] trying to rebrand himself as constructivist in the boardroom?"

Gary Lutin, the founder of the Shareholder Forum, suggests that the Jana-CalSTRS partnership and Apple effort is a very constructive development because it demonstrates that a professionally managed activist hedge fund is focusing on something that supports the foundations of fair business practices. "It is good positioning both for Jana Partners' specialized purpose fund, and it is good for their public image, anything they are doing," Lutin said.

The effort has already developed a lot of buzz, with news articles and TV interviews on the subject, in large part because Rosenstein and Jana Partners were included in the effort. Will other activists and pension funds join forces with similar social campaigns in the future? Expect it, experts say.

Andrew Freedman, a partner at Olshan Frome Wolosky LLP in New York, argues that the partnership goes a long way towards building goodwill between Jana and the ESG-focused institutional investor community at the same time that it also generates good PR and visibility for Jana. "It could also spearhead a trend among the top tier activist investors to seek to wield their influence more holistically on other fronts and issues at public companies," Freedman said.

Columbia's Goodwin agreed that the kind of collaboration exhibited by Jana Partners and CalSTRS would be followed by other funds, though he said he didn't know if other investors will employ similarly formal arrangements. "You are going to see many others do this," Goodwin said. "Some of the well-known activist funds have been privately doing things in the philanthropic arena in part to get a halo effect around their name."

Even so, don't expect Rosenstein to launch a director-election proxy contest if Apple doesn't respond to the Jana Partners-CalSTRS demands. In fact, observers argue that one of the reasons Rosenstein targeted Apple for the campaign is because there is a great likelihood that the iPad and iPhone maker will respond in some way he can say was a win for his campaign.

Columbia's Goodwin argued that Apple seeks to be a good corporate citizen, so the smartphone maker makes for an easy target. "It's an easy win," Goodwin said. "Going after some other corporations would require a bigger fight."

Next on the agenda? A pension fund-hedge fund partnership targeting Coca Cola's impact on childhood obesity? Only time will tell.


© 1996-2018 TheStreet, Inc.

Performance and Shareholder Support

The following graphs of competitive corporate performance and of shareholder voting support for executive compensation are presented for the company addressed in the article.

Full-size graphs of this and other companies you may select can be generated on the Shareholder Forum's websites for Returns on Corporate Capital™  and for Shareholder Support Rankings™. Definitions of both analyses are presented below.

♦ ♦ ♦

Returns on Corporate Capital™ (ROCC) is based on published Methodology and Specifications for calculating net income plus interest expense and income taxes, divided by the balance of total assets less current liabilities other than current debt, according to each company's audited statements of GAAP-defined data as reported to the SEC, without adjustment. The ROCC of each company’s industry competitors is based on the same calculations of the aggregated assets and income for all SEC-reporting companies in the relevant industry other than the subject company. The analyses are produced by the Shareholder Forum using data provided by EDGAR Online from SEC records of approximately 5,700 currently reporting public companies.

Shareholder Support Rankings™ analyses are produced by The Shareholder Forum from research data provided by Proxy Insight, based on company SEC reports of total votes cast in advisory “Say on Pay” shareholder approvals of executive compensation.

© Copyright 2012-2018 The Shareholder Forum, Inc.




This Forum program was 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 purpose of this public Forum's program was 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 was 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 in 2012 in collaboration with The Conference Board and with Thomson Reuters support of communication technologies to address issues and objectives defined by participants in the 2010 "E-Meetings" program relevant to broad public interests in marketplace practices. The website is being maintained to provide continuing reports of the issues addressed in the program, as summarized in the January 5, 2015 Forum Report of Conclusions.

Inquiries about this Forum program and requests to be included in its distribution list may be addressed to

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.