| Search by tag or site | Login to my blog ▪ Start my own blog |
Financial SkepticAccentuating the caveat emptor with critical commentary concerning investor relations and financial communications. I look at how information is (mis)managed and manipulated thereby creating possible investors losses. |
Topps Governance Conflicted
Posted on 08/21/2007 16:29:36 | Link | Post Comment
Topps (Topp) has been grappling with a conflicted take-over that seems to have gone on forever. Yesterday management locked horns with Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS). ISS has recommended against the "Tornante MDP transaction" Management recommends the proposed offer and actually is telling investors which color of proxy card they should sign.
ISS and many others are of the opinion that the Upper Deck offer is better. The rationale seems to revolve along that age old capitalist principal the sale should go to the highest bidder. A quick review of TOPPS corporate governance guidelines indicates
"Director Responsibilities
Directors must exercise sound business judgment and act in what they believe, in good faith, to be the best interests of the Company and its stockholders. ...."
Where is the board in all this? How do they justify selling the company to the not highest bidder?
Management is talking out of both sides of their mouth. They are exhorting shareholders to accept an inferior offer while maintaining discussions with the superior offer.
As I am writing this post another proxy advisory firm (Glass Lewis) issues public comment criticizing management.
This one is a real mess and needs the scrutiny of regulators and judges. The best course of action is to vote no and reset the process. Shareholders interests are not being well served. Quoting from Glass Lewis press release
"In reaching its decision to recommend a vote AGAINST the Merger Agreement, Glass Lewis stated, "We are deeply troubled by the process the board undertook in arriving at the proposed deal, and agree with the Dissident that it did not constitute a full sales process. In our opinion, interested suitors are likely to put forward their best offers only when they are forced to compete. Here, we see that the board only held discussions and negotiations with three bidders, including Tornante-Madison Dearborn, and deliberately chose to refrain from initiating a public sale despite opposition from directors Ajdler and Brog. We believe this decision essentially precluded Topps from enjoying the benefits of true competitive bidding, a process which we believe likely to maximize shareholder value."
ISS and many others are of the opinion that the Upper Deck offer is better. The rationale seems to revolve along that age old capitalist principal the sale should go to the highest bidder. A quick review of TOPPS corporate governance guidelines indicates
"Director Responsibilities
Directors must exercise sound business judgment and act in what they believe, in good faith, to be the best interests of the Company and its stockholders. ...."
Where is the board in all this? How do they justify selling the company to the not highest bidder?
Management is talking out of both sides of their mouth. They are exhorting shareholders to accept an inferior offer while maintaining discussions with the superior offer.
As I am writing this post another proxy advisory firm (Glass Lewis) issues public comment criticizing management.
This one is a real mess and needs the scrutiny of regulators and judges. The best course of action is to vote no and reset the process. Shareholders interests are not being well served. Quoting from Glass Lewis press release
"In reaching its decision to recommend a vote AGAINST the Merger Agreement, Glass Lewis stated, "We are deeply troubled by the process the board undertook in arriving at the proposed deal, and agree with the Dissident that it did not constitute a full sales process. In our opinion, interested suitors are likely to put forward their best offers only when they are forced to compete. Here, we see that the board only held discussions and negotiations with three bidders, including Tornante-Madison Dearborn, and deliberately chose to refrain from initiating a public sale despite opposition from directors Ajdler and Brog. We believe this decision essentially precluded Topps from enjoying the benefits of true competitive bidding, a process which we believe likely to maximize shareholder value."
- Countrywide: Time To Look At The Board
- Gm Veba; Investors Need To Pay Attention
- Axa Research What Is This?
- Ldk Encircled By Wolves
- Bain Submits To Foreign Security Review But Will Investors Benefit
- Oct 2007
- Sep 2007
- Aug 2007
- Jul 2007
- Jun 2007
- May 2007
- Apr 2007
- Mar 2007
- Feb 2007
- Jan 2007
- Dec 2006
- Nov 2006
- Oct 2006
- Sep 2006
- Aug 2006
- Jul 2006
![]()
Examples
ATM Wallstreet - Mon Oct 06, 2008 03:39PM
Made several great trades today. Traded the QID, QQ [read more]
Made several great trades today. Traded the QID, QQ [read more]
ATM Wallstreet - Tue Oct 07, 2008 10:07PM
Today we have the Fed speaking and release of Fed mi [read more]
Today we have the Fed speaking and release of Fed mi [read more]
Morpheus Trading - Tue Oct 07, 2008 08:33AM
NOTE: Please click on the charts below to enlarge them [read more]
NOTE: Please click on the charts below to enlarge them [read more]












<< My Home | TheMoneyBlogs Home