4/29/2029

Shareholder Activism in Asia Drives Global Total to Record High

Nikkei Asia (04/29/29) Shikata, Masayuki

Activist shareholders had their busiest year on record in 2024, with the Asia-Pacific region making up a fifth of campaigns worldwide, pushing some companies higher in the stock market and spurring others to consider going private. The worldwide tally of activist campaigns rose by six to 258, up by half from three years earlier, according to data from financial advisory Lazard. Campaigns in the Asia-Pacific tripled over that period to 57, growing about 30% on the year. Japan accounted for more than 60% of the regional total with 37, an all-time high. Activity is picking up this year as well in the run-up to general shareholders meetings in June. South Korea saw 14 campaigns, a jump of 10 from 2023. Critics say South Korean conglomerates are often controlled by minority investors that care too little about other shareholders. Australia and Hong Kong saw increases of one activist campaign each. North America made up half the global total, down from 60% in 2022 and 85% in 2014. Europe had 62 campaigns last year. The upswing in Japan has been fueled by the push for corporate governance reform since 2013 and the Tokyo Stock Exchange's 2023 call for companies to be more mindful of their share prices. The bourse has encouraged corporations to focus less on share buybacks and dividends than on steps for long-term growth, such as capital spending and the sale of unprofitable businesses. Demands for capital allocation to improve return on investment accounted for 51% of activist activity in Japan last year, significantly higher than the five-year average of 32%. U.S.-based Dalton Investments called on Japanese snack maker Ezaki Glico (2206) to amend its articles of incorporation to allow shareholder returns to be decided by investors as well, not just the board of directors. Though the proposal was rejected, it won more than 40% support, and Glico itself put forward a similar measure that was approved at the following general shareholders meeting in March. U.K.-based Palliser Capital took a stake last year in developer Tokyo Tatemono (8804) and argued that more efficient use of its capital, such as selling a cross-held stake in peer Hulic, would boost corporate value. Activist investors are increasingly seeking to lock in unrealized gains from rising land prices, reaping quick profits from property sales that can go toward dividends. Companies in the Tokyo Stock Exchange's broad Topix index had 25.88 trillion yen ($181 billion at current rates) in unrealized gains on property holdings at the end of March 2024, up about 20% from four years earlier. After buying into Mitsui Fudosan (8801) in 2024, U.S.-based Elliott Investment Management this year took a stake in Sumitomo Realty & Development (8830) and is expected to push for the developer to sell real estate holdings. This month, Dalton sent a letter to Fuji Media Holdings (4676), parent of Fuji Television, calling for it to spin off its real estate business and replace its board of directors. Activist campaigns have sparked share price rallies at some companies. Shares of elevator maker Fujitec (6406) were up roughly 80% from March 2023, when it dismissed Takakazu Uchiyama -- a member of the founding family -- as chairman under pressure from Oasis Management. The rise in demands from activists "creates a sense of tension among management, including at companies that don't receive such proposals," said Masatoshi Kikuchi, chief equity strategist at Mizuho Securities. Previously tight cross-shareholdings are being unwound, and reasonable proposals from minority investors are more likely to garner support from foreign shareholders. Some companies are going private to shield themselves from perceived pressure. Investments by buyout funds targeting mature companies in the Asia-Pacific were the highest in three years in 2024, according to Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu. Toyota Industries (6201) is considering going this route after facing pressure from investment funds last year to take steps such as dissolving a parent-child listing with a subsidiary and buying back more shares. Toyota Industries holds a 9% stake in Toyota Motor (7203). The automaker "may have proposed having [Toyota Industries] go private as a precautionary measure," said a source at an investment bank.

Read the article

12/18/2025

Opinion: Lululemon Is Feeling the Hedge Fund Burn

Bloomberg (12/18/25) Felsted, Andrea

Bloomberg Opinion Columnist Andrea Felsted says Elliott Investment Management is sweating Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU). Elliott Management has taken a more than $1 billion stake in the fancy gym-wear pioneer, and is working with a chief executive officer candidate, former Ralph Lauren Corp. finance director Jane Nielsen. This intervention isn’t about a breakup or financial engineering, some of the other weapons in the Elliott arsenal. It’s about trying to make Lululemon cool again. Top of the list is designing clothes that women want to wear, restoring some brand sparkle and reconnecting with customers who’ve abandoned the chain. There’s a vociferous founder in the form of Chip Wilson to handle too. To that end Elliott’s gambit looks like the position it took in Starbucks Corp. (SBUX) 18 months ago, when the company was struggling with long queues and cautious consumers, and Howard Schultz — who built the coffeehouse we know today — was sniping from the sidelines. Lululemon clearly needs a change of direction after it announced last week it would part company with CEO Calvin McDonald. It’s facing a crowd of nimbler “athleisure” upstarts such as Alo Yoga, and SoftBank Group Corp. (SFTBY)-backed Vuori. Nielsen looks like an effective operator. She spent more than eight years at Ralph Lauren (RL), first as finance director, then adding chief operating officer to her remit. She also played an integral part in the turnaround at Coach (TPR). She should be able to get to grips with the core of Lululemon’s appeal, which is athletic wear, and jettison some of the more peripheral ventures including a tie-up with the National Football League. After all, one element of Ralph Lauren’s recent success has been concentrating on its “hero” products — especially its sweaters, which are having a moment. Nielsen also looks qualified to tackle Lululemon’s operational snafus, such as matching demand from shoppers with its supply of leggings, sports bras and other basics. This would help make the shops, which have become too cluttered with markdowns, more appealing places. Better profits would follow. But fixing and executing on the retail nuts and bolts isn’t Lululemon’s only challenge. It needs a leader who can help it delight its affluent customers. The brand has strong skills in fit and fabric, but its styles have become boring. It must become trendier to compete with Kim Kardashian’s Skims, which has tied up with Nike Inc. (NKE). There’s an untapped market for work clothing that’s smart yet comfortable. Nielsen’s experience with Ralph Lauren’s sophisticated casual ranges should help. Lululemon’s marketing has lost its early pizazz and needs livening up, particularly to lure younger customers. It appointed Jonathan Cheung as creative director last year, and McDonald said last week that new lines would arrive in 2026. If Nielsen takes the helm, she’d need to build on this. Ralph Lauren is a good model. The executive team, including Nielsen, polished its image and cut discounting, but the founder’s vision was never compromised. The marketing budget rose sharply, an encouraging sign for an exec with a finance background. Elliott, and potentially Nielsen, face their own founder challenge: Wilson has kept sniping even after McDonald’s departure. His aims and that of Paul Singer's activist hedge fund may be at odds. While Wilson has had contact with Nielsen, he's trained his fire on changing the company's board. Lululemon said on Thursday that it was expanding its international operations, but didn't comment on Elliott's stake. If the investor manages to install Nielsen, and she can both improve operational performance and reimagine its product and brand, the rewards could be rich. Before the announcement of McDonald's departure, shares in Lululemon had fallen more than 50% in the space of a year. Even after a recent recovery, they're only priced at about 17 times future earnings. That's roughly in line with mass-market retailers such as American Eagle Outfitters Inc. (AEO) and Victoria's Secret & Co. (VSCO). But it's well below Lululemon's five-year average of 27 times and Nike's 31 times. If it gets its premium cachet back for the stuff it sells, its rating should follow. Ralph Lauren shares, for comparison, have almost quadrupled since 2016. You can see why Elliott is pinning its hopes on one of the architects of that success. Lululemon stock was trading more than 6% higher Thursday. There are some grounds for caution, though. Elliott’s bet on Starbucks is yet to pay off. The coffee chain is probably a more complicated turnaround, with CEO Brian Niccol needing to tackle a byzantine product range and making its sites less off-putting for customers. Starbucks shares have given up most of the gains made after his hiring. Revitalizing Lululemon won’t be an easy workout session either. Fashion is notoriously fickle and the whole athleisure concept is losing its edge as people smarten up again. With an activist on the register, it’ll be feeling the burn a little while longer.

Read the article

12/18/2025

Opinion: US Minerals Quest Steps Into Korea Governance Mess

Reuters Breakingviews (12/18/25) Mak, Robyn

Breaking Views columnist Robyn Mak says when U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order to rebrand the Department of Defense as the Department of War, he was probably not thinking of corporate governance battles in South Korea. Nevertheless, his administration's decision to build a new zinc refinery stateside has dragged it into one of the country's messiest takeover feuds. The saga is another reminder of the pitfalls of state meddling in private firms. There's little to fault the strategic rationale of joining forces with Korea Zinc's (010130) $7.4 billion refining project. The United States is keen to cut its reliance on China for materials vital to chips, electronics and weapons. The $18 billion Korean company is the world's top zinc smelter and produces 14 of the 54 critical minerals designated by Washington as essential to national and economic security. The latest agreement envisages Korea Zinc building and operating a large-scale facility in Tennessee that will begin producing zinc, lead and copper before expanding to strategic minerals like antimony and germanium. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick hailed the initiative as a “big win for America." The financial small print is messier. Korea Zinc will get access to up to $4.7 billion of loans plus $210 million in subsidies for the project. But in an odd move, it is also creating a joint venture that will inject $1.9 billion into Korea Zinc in return for a roughly 10% stake. The company will in turn take a similar shareholding in the joint venture, in which the Department of Defense will hold a 40% voting stake. The new unit will not directly own or operate the U.S. refinery, which will be wholly owned by Korea Zinc. The company has yet to explain the reason for diluting investors or for creating a new circular shareholding of the type that many of South Korea's family-controlled conglomerates are unwinding. True, this joint venture would allow Korea Zinc to keep full control of the U.S. smelter, according to someone familiar with the matter. But the biggest beneficiary may be Chair Yun B. Choi, who since October last year has been locked in a fierce battle for control with the company's top shareholders, Young Poong and private equity giant MBK Partners. Issuing shares to a potential ally might tip the balance of power in Choi's favor. It's not clear that the U.S. government realized it was potentially picking sides in a bitter corporate dispute. The Department of Defense did not respond to a request for comment. However, Young Poong and MBK are legally challenging the share issue, partly on grounds that it is designed to "preserve" Choi's grip over the company. The project's fate will now be decided by a court in Seoul. The outcome could be an embarrassing hitch for Trump's administration, which is eager to buy shares in companies it deems strategic. In August, for example, the government took a 10% stake in ailing chipmaker Intel (INTC). Korea Zinc is a reminder that sometimes the art of the deal is not so different from the art of war.

Read the article

12/16/2025

Shareholder Activism Targeting South Korean Companies Surges 6.6 Times in 5 Years

Asia Business Daily (12/16/25) HyeongMin, Kim

Shareholder activism targeting Korean companies has increased nearly sevenfold over the past five years. With the KOSPI index surpassing 4,000 on November 27 and the stock market experiencing a boom, there is growing support for the need for legal and institutional measures to preemptively address the potential side effects of heightened shareholder activism. The Korea Economic Research Institute announced on the 16th that it had commissioned Choi Joon-sun, Professor Emeritus at Sungkyunkwan University Law School, to prepare a report titled "Trends in Shareholder Activism and Response Tasks." Citing data compiled by global research firm Diligent Market Intelligence, the report pointed out that shareholder activism targeting Korean companies surged from 10 companies in 2020 to 66 companies last year. The methods of shareholder activism varied, including sending public letters, proxy battles, shareholder proposals, demands for ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) policies, strengthening shareholder returns through dividends or share buybacks, as well as lawsuits and attempts at hostile mergers and acquisitions (M&A). As shareholder activism has increased, shareholder proposals have also become more active. According to disclosures from the Financial Supervisory Service, a total of 164 shareholder proposals were submitted to 42 listed companies at this year's regular general shareholders' meetings. This represents a 20% increase compared to the 137 proposals recorded the previous year. The expansion of shareholder activism has been attributed to an increase in individual investors. According to data from the Korea Securities Depository, the number of individual investors rose significantly from approximately 6 million in 2019 to 14.1 million at the end of last year. The report also noted that individual shareholders are increasingly gathering through online platforms utilizing IT technology, further promoting shareholder activities. As of the end of July, the combined membership of the two major minority shareholder IT platforms, ACT and Heyholder, reached 165,000. Through these IT platforms, minority shareholders can exchange information at much lower costs than before and effectively consolidate their shares and exercise voting rights. Professor Choi analyzed, "Depending on the degree of shareholder consolidation, it has become possible for shareholders to stand on an equal footing with the largest shareholder, and there have been cases where they have succeeded in asserting their interests against target companies." He added, "Hedge funds, instead of investing large sums to secure stakes, can now easily carry out activism by aligning with various shareholder groups." Professor Choi also pointed out that these changes could undermine the function and role of the board of directors. Following the first and second amendments to the Commercial Act-such as the duty of loyalty of directors to shareholders, the parallel holding of electronic general meetings, and the mandatory cumulative voting system-the third amendment currently pending in the National Assembly (mandatory cancellation of treasury shares and advisory shareholder proposals) could, if passed, make it impossible for companies to defend management rights using treasury shares. He further noted that agenda items that should be decided at the board's discretion would have to be addressed at general shareholders' meetings under the pretext of "advisory shareholder proposals," potentially shifting the center of corporate management from the board of directors to the general shareholders' meeting. This could ultimately weaken the authority and autonomy of the board of directors guaranteed by the Commercial Act. He also warned, "The general shareholders' meeting could deviate from its essence as the highest decision-making body of a corporation and become a venue for sharp confrontation among shareholders over social issues." The business community is calling for legislative improvements to prevent such side effects. There is a need for prior oversight and the establishment of clear regulations in the process of shareholder proposals for director nominations and proxy solicitation. Regarding shareholder proposals for director nominations, Professor Choi stated that, just as with the largest shareholder, candidates for director nominated by ordinary shareholders should also disclose detailed information. The independence of directors must be ensured regardless of who the nominator is, but currently, candidates nominated by ordinary shareholders are only required to indicate whether there is a "conflict of interest" with the nominator, which is insufficient. He emphasized that detailed information and transaction relationships should be disclosed in advance so that the independence of both the nominator and nominee is clearly demonstrated. He also argued that prior oversight and clear regulations are necessary to address circumvention and illegalities in the proxy solicitation process. There have been cases where some shareholders collect proxies in the so-called "gray areas" where financial authorities find it difficult to intervene, often without any formal reporting. Given the heavy responsibility of shareholders who secure more than a 5% stake and deeply intervene in corporate management through shareholder proposals, there is growing support for strictly applying the large shareholding reporting system (the 5% rule) and the joint ownership requirements under the Capital Markets Act to shareholder activism involving coalitions of individual investors. There are also suggestions that when certain shareholders' involvement in management runs counter to the interests of the company or infringes upon the interests of other stakeholders, they should be held accountable for abusing shareholder rights. This is because there may be cases where shareholders obtain important information through activist activities and provide it to third parties for private gain. There is also a demand for a monitoring system to prevent market-disrupting behaviors such as unfair trading or the dissemination of false information via online platforms. Professor Choi urged, "With legislative improvements, companies should establish or revise board operation rules to clearly define and disclose in advance the requirements that apply to both board-nominated and shareholder-nominated director candidates."

Read the article

12/16/2025

Opinion: Legendary Gamemaker Seems Trapped in a Final Fantasy

Bloomberg (12/16/25) Reidy, Gearoid

Bloomberg Opinion columnist Gearoid Reidy writes that the darling of the videogames industry in 2025 is a title in the genre known as a Japanese RPG, or role-playing game. There’s only one problem: It’s not from Japan. Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, by the small French studio Sandfall Interactive, was developed on a shoestring budget of just $10 million. Last week at the Game Awards in Los Angeles, accepting the closest thing the industry has to a Best Picture Oscar, director Guillaume Broche singled out Hironobu Sakaguchi, the Japanese creator of Final Fantasy, who inspired him to become a game developer. The student may have surpassed the teacher. Sakaguchi’s successors at Square Enix Holdings Co. (9684) are struggling. Clair Obscur easily outsold 2023’s Final Fantasy XVI, the latest installment in the long-running series, in just a few months. The company is awash in layoffs and cancelled projects. Last month, it almost halved this year’s net income forecast. The struggles have caught the attention of 3D Investment Partners. Having amassed a stake of more than 15%, it’s now the second-largest shareholder. In a 100-page document submitted to management in September but made public only last week, 3D accused executives of presiding over a “pronounced stagnation in both revenue growth and profitability” and dared them to “once again, surprise us, move us and ignite that passion we once felt.” There is a sense among gamers, which 3D has smartly latched on to, that the reason games like Clair Obscur are outselling those from the firm that created the JRPG is that management has been focused on the wrong things. In recent years, its chief executives have made headlines for endorsing the likes of blockchain gaming, non-fungible tokens and the metaverse — faddish ideas that might sound good to profit-chasing investors, but don’t lead to interesting games. The current leadership continues that trend, highlighting ideas such as automating 70% of quality assurance testing by the end of 2027 in a recent update to its mid-term management plan. That’s a fine idea (debugging is one of the most tedious parts of game development), but its prominent location right at the beginning of the presentation heightens concerns that management isn’t sufficiently focused on the games. That Chief Executive Takashi Kiryu hails not from the industry but from advertising giant Dentsu Group Inc. also worries those who think the firm has taken its eye off the ball. To put it another way, you don’t hear the creators of Clair Obscur talking about NFTs and AI. Alongside disappointing sales of perennial titles, management has also presided over some expensive new disasters, such as the half-hearted service game Marvel’s Avengers and the action RPG Forspoken, lambasted for cringeworthy writing. Others have never left the development floor, with 3D highlighting that Square Enix spends far more on writing down titles that have never been released than rivals do.

Read the article

12/15/2025

Opinion: Why Trump Is Targeting Proxy Advisers

Wall Street Journal (12/15/25) Copland, James R.

James R. Copland, director of legal policy for the Manhattan Institute and a member of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Investor Advisory Committee, writes that President Trump issued a major executive order last Thursday that will help investors by kicking politics out of company boardrooms. It targets the proxy adviser industry, which advises pension funds, mutual funds and hedge funds on how to vote on corporate ballot items. This industry is long overdue for the “accountability, transparency, and competition” the order calls for. Two firms, ISS and Glass Lewis, control roughly 90% of the proxy advisory market. Each is foreign-owned: ISS is majority-owned by Deutsche Börse Group; Glass Lewis is owned by Peloton Capital Management, a Canadian private-equity firm, and its chairman, Stephen Smith. Aside from industry concentration and foreign ownership, two salient facts about these firms highlight the need for more federal oversight. First, although they only advise rather than direct voting for institutional investors, ISS and Glass Lewis exert a huge influence over a large swath of the American stock market. A 2021 Manhattan Institute study by Paul Rose, now dean of the Case Western Reserve University law school, found that 114 institutional investors with assets under management of more than $5 trillion voted in lockstep alignment with either ISS or Glass Lewis in 2020. An earlier study I co-wrote with Manhattan Institute colleagues found that an ISS recommendation “for” a shareholder proposal was associated with a 15-percentage-point increase in support; other studies have shown similar results, with Glass Lewis also having a major, if smaller, influence. Second, ISS and Glass Lewis have long been the driving force behind left-leaning adventurism in corporate boardrooms—backing the environmental and social proposals that constitute the “E” and “S” in ESG investing. In 2024 ISS supported 53% of all “social” shareholder proposals, while Glass Lewis supported 43%. ISS supported proposals at more than a dozen large companies to report on their “pay gaps” by race and sex. It backed proposals at eight others to report on their “diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts.” In 2025, perhaps owing to the change in administrations in Washington, ISS backed off its promotion of fashionable social causes; Glass Lewis, unlike ISS, still considers race and sex diversity in its recommendations for corporate directorships. And although ISS radically scaled back support for social proposals in 2025 and supported “only” 28% of environmental proposals this year, down from 61% in 2024, it still supported asking Deere & Co. to conduct a civil-rights audit. Support for these policies is particularly vexing given the strong evidence that they’re negatively associated with share value. With two foreign-owned proxy advisory firms pushing America’s biggest companies to the left, the administration was bound to take action. During the first Trump term, the Securities and Exchange Commission promulgated rules governing proxy advisers, but subsequent rescissions by the Biden SEC and litigation have left the industry mostly unregulated. Now that the White House has acted, it falls on the administrative agencies to carry out the executive order. The principal onus falls on the SEC, which oversees the stock market, but the order also mentions the Federal Trade Commission, which oversees antitrust issues, and the Labor Department, which oversees pension plans. The SEC, the order says, may need to revise or rescind “all rules, regulations, guidance, bulletins, and memoranda relating to shareholder proposals”—the main vehicle through which proxy advisers and various social-activist investors have pressured companies to jump on the ESG and DEI bandwagons. Chairman Paul Atkins has already flagged the questionable legal foundations of the SEC’s longstanding shareholder proposal rule in his public remarks. Even though proxy advisers have been at the leading edge of pushing companies to “go woke,” the big-three passive index fund families—BlackRock (BLK), Vanguard, and State Street (STT)—have also supported many ESG measures over the years. As ETF leader Jan van Eck recently observed in these pages, such shareholder activism is particularly incongruent for investment funds that merely mirror stock market indexes. Here’s hoping that the SEC considers clarifying that passive funds’ fiduciary duties should guide them to vote the way they invest—passively. But make no mistake: The president’s Dec. 11 executive order is a major shake-up to how publicly traded corporations in America are governed. It’s welcome news for those who would prefer companies to focus on making money, not political causes—including investors and pensioners who rely on their stock portfolios for their retirements.

Read the article

12/12/2025

Private Finance Structures to Drive Bumper Japan M&A into 2026, Goldman Says

Reuters (12/12/25) Bridge, Miho; Uranaka, Taiga

Japan's mergers and acquisitions market is set to maintain buoyant growth momentum into 2026, with increasing deal sizes supported by innovative financing structures involving private capital, a Goldman Sachs executive said. As Japan's largest companies streamline business portfolios and target growth investments, financing structures that tap the vast pool of private capital are set to bring more deals over the line, David Dubner, chief operating officer of global M&A and head of M&A structuring, said in an interview with Reuters. These "high-grade" financing models combine equity and debt with private credit sourced from long-term private capital such as insurers. When partnering with large investment-grade corporates, the structures maintain investment-grade credit ratings, which significantly lower capital costs. Dubner said these strategies are likely to further fuel Japan's M&A boom, which neared record levels in 2025. Globally, they are increasingly used to finance AI-related data center and power infrastructure. Japan's M&A deal value in the year to December 10 totalled $315 billion, LSEG data showed, the highest in the past 25 years bar the $343 billion logged in 2018. "Japanese companies want to invest in innovation and growth opportunities," Dubner said. "The buyers are trying not to overstrain their balance sheets and look for creative sources of capital." Private equity firms with insurance capital arms are aggressively seeking opportunities to invest and their partnerships with strategic buyers provide an additional source of capital beyond traditional financing such as equity and debt. This expands the scope for Japanese firms' buyout opportunities. "Some of the targets that Japanese firms thought were a stretch are real now," Dubner said. Bigger deals are also on the horizon. Many of Japan's blue-chip firms retain sizeable non-core businesses and trade at a conglomerate discount despite Japanese authorities' multi-year effort to encourage companies to consider their shareholder returns. And activist investors are echoing the Tokyo Stock Exchange's calls for corporate governance changes, ramping up the pressure on companies to take action.

Read the article

12/11/2025

Pre-Clinical Trial Giant Eyes Organ-on-a-Chip Companies After Activist Investor Engagement

Boston Business Journal (12/11/25) Baratham-Green, Hannah

Charles River Laboratories Inc. (CRL) has evolved significantly from its roots as a research animal breeder in 1947 to its current role in the industry as a widely used contract research organization. But it's the Wilmington-based contract research organization's latest evolution that is sparking a lot of conversation. Earlier this year, Charles River reached an agreement with shareholder Elliott Investment Management to conduct a strategic review of its business and shake up its board. Further announcements followed, including the decision to sell “underperforming or non-core businesses,” and focus on areas with more growth potential. Birgit Girshick, chief operating officer of Charles River, recently spoke with the Business Journal about new technologies the company is eyeing, the pros and cons of sharing strategies so publicly, and what she’s looking forward to in 2026. Girshick has seen much of Charles Rivers’ transformation firsthand. She joined the company in 1989 and has held numerous positions in her tenure, most recently being named chief operating officer in October 2021. Girshick said the company is continuously evaluating the business with the goal of making drug development more efficient. “If you look at our strategic review, we made it a little more public after the shareholder that wanted to really review what our plans are,” Girshick said. “So we went in and we did a holistic review of where we believe Charles River needs to invest in in order to continue to be relevant, and become even more relevant for our client and for drug development.” Girshick said that Charles River is looking to add new technologies to its portfolio, like new alternative methods to animal testing such as organ-on-a-chip technology. Charles River plans to do some internal innovation, Girshick said, but it's also eyeing the roughly 1,000 companies out there offering the new methods. “We have the scale and breadth of being able to take those technologies, either acquire or partner with some of those 1,000 companies ... where we think it has the most relevance, and bring it in, make it repeatable and scalable and use it on the thousands of preclinical programs that are out there,” Girshick said. Girshick said these new alternative methods will not replace animal testing, but will give researchers information on whether or not they to run an animal test, avoiding unnecessary experiments. The alternative methods are not a new trend, but under the Trump administration, the FDA has been trying to spur the development and adoption of technologies that can reduce or replace the use of animal testing in drug development. Charles River is also looking to sell off some businesses by the middle of 2026. The businesses that the company plans to divest represent about 7% of Charles Rivers' estimated 2025 revenue. While Girshick didn't specify which businesses were on the chopping block, she offered some criteria Charles River will consider in its decisions. Girshick said divested businesses could be those that have seen a change in demand, or are in the wrong location for that type of business. “For example, if it's a small business that needs a lot of capital, we may not be the company who can provide that capital at the time,” she added. “Or if it takes too long to scale something, we may not be the company that wants to wait patiently for this technology.” Girshick said that sharing details of the company's strategy more publicly is a “give and take." On the one hand, announcing pending divestitures can cause uncertainty for employees. On the other side, providing more details gives shareholders more certainty about the future of the company. “What you saw in our announcement was a balance of shareholders, of stakeholders. And I can tell you, nobody was happy, but nobody was totally unhappy,” Girshick said. Charles River's stock price had declined considerably in the spring, partly due to cuts to federal NIH funding and then an FDA announcement that it would phase out animal testing requirements for monoclonal antibodies and other drugs. Despite these hits, Charles River's stock has recovered this year and is now up slightly from Jan. 1. Confidence appears to be growing in the company's strategy as it continues to share more details. After a challenging 2025 characterized by uncertainty in the industry, Girshick is hoping for positive momentum next year. Funding is improving, and companies are adjusting to the new normal after FDA turnover, tariffs and public market challenges dominated the conversation in 2025. “I hear from my clients that we can go back to work next year,” Girshick said. “I do think that what will happen in 2026 is that there will be a refocus on bringing drugs to market, research — focus back to the patient, which is the most important thing.”

Read the article