This post describes the results produced so far during the 2013 proxy season as a result of the work that the Shareholder Rights Project (SRP) has done on behalf of SRP-represented clients. Thus far, this work has already resulted in the following 2013 outcomes:

• 19 boards of S&P 500 and Fortune 500 companies declassified following the adoption of agreed-upon management proposals at 2013 annual meetings; and
• 13 precatory proposals passed at the 2013 annual meetings of S&P 500 and Fortune 500 companies, with an average support of 78%.

Further details about these results (including lists of all the relevant S&P 500 and Fortune 500 companies) are provided below. We note that these results add to those obtained during 2012 in which the work of the SRP and SRP-represented investors resulted in:

…continue reading: SRP Mid-Proxy-Season Results: 19 Boards Declassified, 13 Precatory Declassification Proposals Passed

Early Lessons from the 2013 Proxy Season

As Skadden monitors the initial weeks of the 2013 proxy season, we are seeing the following preliminary trends:

Vote Results

Of the first 279 companies of the Russell 3000 to report the results of say-on-pay proposals, approximately:

• 72 percent have passed with over 90 percent support;
• 22 percent have passed with between 70.1 percent and 90 percent support;
• 4 percent have passed with between 50 percent and 70 percent support; and
• 2 percent (six companies) obtained less than 50 percent support.

…continue reading: Emerging Say-on-Pay Trends and Litigation Developments

Complaints that investors only look for short-term gains are nothing new. As early as 1990 an Economist article proclaimed: “The old bugbear of businessmen — that fund managers are too obsessed with the short term, and unwilling to buy shares in companies with ambitious research projects — is back on the prowl.”

Recently, the turnover of shares in listed companies has grown to numbers far exceeding those of 1990. Does this change in investor behavior influence the behavior of managers in listed firms?

The institutional innovation of freely tradable shares, traceable to Holland in the 17th century, made it possible for companies such as the Dutch East India Company to have longer investment horizons than individual investors. Listing shares ensured that an investor could recoup his money from other investors and that, as a result, companies didn’t have to repay individual investors. Seen in this light, one might assume that investor short-termism would have little influence on board decisions at listed companies and much more influence on board decisions at privately held companies. General opinion, however, disagrees.

…continue reading: Short-Termism of Institutional Investors and the Double Agency Problem

I am particularly pleased to be at a conference that focuses on the role of institutional investors and their impact on corporate control, market liquidity, and systemic risk. The SEC has a great deal of interest in these areas and I hope that you will provide us with any observations that can help inform the SEC’s understanding.

Role Played by Institutional Investors

The topic of your conference recognizes the important role played by institutional investors and the great influence they exert in our capital markets. The role and influence of institutional investors has grown over time. For example, the proportion of U.S. public equities managed by institutions has risen steadily over the past six decades, from about 7 or 8% of market capitalization in 1950, to about 67 % in 2010. The shift has come as more American families participate in the capital markets through pooled-investment vehicles, such as mutual funds and exchange traded funds (ETFs).

Institutional investor ownership is an even more significant factor in the largest corporations: In 2009, institutional investors owned in the aggregate 73% of the outstanding equity in the 1,000 largest U.S. corporations.

…continue reading: Institutional Investors: Power and Responsibility

Say on Pay Continues to Shape the Executive Pay Landscape

An overwhelming 97% of Russell 3000 companies that conducted a Say on Pay (SOP) vote in 2012 received majority shareholder support. [1] While support levels rival those for management proposals to ratify auditors, companies do not take SOP vote outcomes for granted. Rather, the prospects for low shareholder support for SOP proposals have caused most companies to devote a tremendous amount of time, resources, and consideration to the administration and disclosure of executive compensation programs. This paper serves to highlight the key issues compensation committees faced in 2012 and the implications for action in 2013 and beyond.

…continue reading: Executive Compensation 2012 Year in Review and Implications

With the proxy season just getting underway, we thought it might be useful to summarize some initial observations to aid those in the midst of the season’s challenges.

Results. According to Institutional Shareholder Services’ (ISS) 2013 Say on Pay Snapshot released April 8, 2013, ISS has recommended against 10 percent of issuers so far this proxy season. While ISS’s study represents a relatively small sample size (473 companies), a “no” recommendation from ISS against 10 percent of companies represents a decrease in “no” recommendations of over 20 percent from last year (12.2 percent).

Reasons for Failure. The single largest reason that companies have received “no” recommendations from ISS continues to be a so-called pay-for-performance disconnect. In addition, ISS has recommended against an increased number of companies on the basis of a so-called lack of compensation committee communications and effectiveness. A lack of effectiveness often arises where ISS has determined that the company has not provided disclosure about actions it has taken in light of a low say on pay vote for the previous year.

…continue reading: Say on Pay So Far – 2013

As a result of the work of the Shareholder Rights Project (SRP) and SRP-represented investors, declassification proposals will be voted on in April and May 2013 at the annual meetings of 36 S&P 500 and Fortune 500 companies:

• At 28 companies, agreed-upon management proposals to declassify will be brought to a shareholder vote of approval pursuant to agreements entered into with SRP-represented investors;
• At 8 companies, where such agreements have not been reached, precatory proposals that the SRP has submitted on behalf of SRP-represented investors will go to a vote.

These 36 proposals are in addition to 9 proposals that already went to a vote and were approved at annual meetings of S&P 500 and Fortune 500 companies in 2013 (3 management proposals and 6 precatory proposals), as well as the many additional declassification proposals (both agreed-upon management proposals and precatory proposals) that will go to a vote at subsequent annual meetings.

…continue reading: 36 Declassification Proposals Going to a Vote in April and May

In the fourth quarter of 2012, FINRA published Regulatory Notice 12-42 (the “Revised Proposal”), amending its proposal for substantive regulation of fixed-income research by FINRA-member firms. [1] The Revised Proposal represents the revision of FINRA’s earlier proposal, and modifies that proposal in meaningful ways. [2]

Executive Summary:

The Revised Proposal amends FINRA’s earlier proposal. In particular, the Revised Proposal:

…continue reading: Breaking Down FINRA’s Revised Proposed Fixed-Income Research Rule

In its news alert released yesterday, the Shareholder Rights Project (SRP), working on behalf of eight SRP-represented investors, announced that proposals submitted for 2013 meetings have already had significant impact. As discussed below, major results obtained so far include the following:

• Following active engagement, 46 S&P 500 and Fortune 500 companies that received shareholder proposals for 2013 annual meetings have already agreed to move towards annual elections.
• These 46 companies represent more than 60% of the companies receiving shareholder proposals from SRP-represented investors for the 2013 proxy season.
• Together with the 2012 work of the SRP, 91 companies — about three-quarters of the S&P 500 and Fortune 500 companies that received proposals in 2012, 2013 or both — have agreed to move towards annual elections. The aggregate market capitalization of these 91 companies exceeded one trillion dollars as of March 1, 2013.

…continue reading: Substantial 2013 Results Already Produced by SRP and SRP-Represented Investors

Although the 2013 proxy season is still in its early stages, board declassification proposals submitted by the Shareholder Rights Project (SRP) on behalf of SRP-represented investors have already gone to a vote at the 2013 annual meetings of six S&P 500 and Fortune 500 companies, and these proposals all passed by substantial majorities, receiving average support of 79% of votes cast.

This result continues the strong record of success for SRP-represented investors in 2012, and reflects the on-going strong support for board declassification among institutional investors. The table below provides information concerning these six precatory declassification proposals, all submitted on behalf of the Massachusetts Pension Reserves Investment Management Board (PRIM).

DECLASSIFICATION PROPOSALS GOING TO A VOTE SO FAR IN 2013

…continue reading: Initial 2013 Annual Meeting Results: Six Board Declassification Proposals Passed with Average Support of 79%