Media Center

Featuring all breaking news and in depth articles and editorial press coverage pertaining to shareholder activism and corporate governance.

Japan’s LDP Mulls Transparency Rules for Shareholder Activists
Cevian-Linked Funds Report 12.235936% Voting Stake in Smith & Nephew
New Ferretti Head Rejects Claims of Breach of Italy Golden Power Rules
Harwood Capital Pushing for M&C Saatchi Break-Up Builds Stake
Snap CEO Spiegel Defends Specs as Long-Term Bet, Pushes Back Against Irenic Capital Management Pressure
Victoria’s Secret Investors Back Full Board After Proxy Battle
GameStop Investor Brings Suit Over CEO’s $35 Billion Pay Package
Palliser Urges Taiwan Firm WUS to Privatize, Lift Value
Elliott Said to Take Almost 5% Stake in UK Distributor Bunzl
Ananym Capital Management Urges Bio-Techne to Consider Selling
Supreme Court Bars Activist Investors From Suing Funds Under Investor Law
Uber Weighs Delivery Hero Asset Sales to Smooth Full Takeover
Genesco Revises Proxy as Activist With 8% Stake Seeks Four Directors
Victoria's Secret Shareholders Side With Board Over Investor
Japan Governance Reforms Set to Prise Open $1.8 Trillion Cash Hoard
Northern Star Investor Steps Up Pressure for Major Changes
LSEG Slowly Sheds 'AI Risk' Tag With Drive to Show Growth
Spire Healthcare Takeover Deadline for Toscafund Extended to June 25
Victoria’s Secret & Co. Shareholders Decisively Re-Elect All Nine Company Director Nominees
Vale's Top Shareholder Pushes for Meeting on Chairman's Removal
Northern Star Admits to Takeover Bids Amid Elliott Investment Management Pressure
Biotech Company Shareholders Elect Chris Christie in Rejecting Doma Perpetual Capital Management LLC's Slate
Australian Billionaire Brett Blundy Wages High-Stakes Campaign to Oust Chair of Victoria’s Secret
BP Investors Push for Clarity Over Ousting of Chair
3D Investment Partners: Leading Proxy Advisory Firm Glass Lewis Recommends Toho Holdings Shareholders Vote “AGAINST” the Proposed Poison Pill
Capital Group Raises KT&G Stake to 7.2%
Ancora Builds Stake in Ashland, Pushes for Sale
Jana Urges Fiserv to Sell More Assets, Refresh Board
Independent Proxy Advisory Firms ISS and Glass Lewis Unanimously Support the Election of ALL Director Nominees at Dynacor’s AGM
Japanese Firms Field Record Proposals From Activists at This Year's Shareholder Meetings
Shareholder Activism in Asia Drives Global Total to Record High
Dealmakers See More Retail Mergers and IPOs in 2026 After Tariffs Sidelined M&A Last Year
Foreign Activists Take Aim at Bigger Targets in Corporate Japan
CarMax Earnings on Deck: New CEO Faces Profitability Test
What Next for BP? Leadership Exits Test Investor Confidence in Board Oversight
How Cracker Barrel’s CEO Saved Her Job by Abandoning Her Own Strategy
Commentary: Northern Star Demerger Idea Gains Currency After Elliott Activism, as CEO Search Continues
Commentary: Activist Pressure Starts With Underperformance
Activist Investors Come to Japan and Are Not Always Unwelcome
Japan Railroad Stocks Attract Investors Eyeing Property Holdings
Commentary: Elliott Investment Management Pressures Northern Star as Gold Miner Hunts for New Chief Executive
Commentary: Elliott Brings the Stick to Whack Northern Star into Shape
Most Activist Investors Are Not Really Activist Investors
The Honeywell Lifer Deconstructing a 141-Year-Old Industrials Empire
TCI (Cellnex) and Third Point (Indra) Make Spain World’s 7th Largest Market for “Activist Funds,” With Positions Worth $3.97 Billion
Dan Loeb Says Tech Is the Most Attractive Sector Right Now — Unless You Hold This ‘Draconian’ View
Figma Gets an Investor. Exhibit A on Why Companies Don’t Want to Go Public.
After Bitter Proxy Fight, Lululemon CEO Could Use War Chest to Revamp Bruised Brand
Is Chris Hohn Britain’s Answer to Warren Buffett?
Elliott Ramps Up Its AI Efforts With Key Hire From Blackstone
Editorial: The Proxy Advisers Strike Back
Shareholder Activism in Asia Surges 23% as Reforms Push Corporate Governance Up the Agenda
This Mini Berkshire Hathaway Is a Buy. Jana Partners Is Pushing to Break It Up.
Informal Activist Settlements Gain Ground but Raise Concerns
The Chip Craze Is Turning a Glass Company and a Toilet Maker Into AI Stocks
Can the Meme Stock King Pull off Audacious eBay Swoop?
Lululemon’s New CEO Is Already in the Hot Seat—and She Hasn’t Even Started
How Toilet Maker Toto Turned its Ceramics Know-How Into an AI Play
Ingles Markets’ Real Estate Grabs Attention in Proxy Fight
Opinion: Lululemon’s CEO Choice Is a Missed Chance to Pacify Elliott

6/17/2026

Japan’s LDP Mulls Transparency Rules for Shareholder Activists

Bloomberg (06/17/26) Terukina, Akemi; Sano, Hideyuki; Tamura, Yasutaka

Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party is considering measures to make the behavior of activist investors more transparent and to help companies deal with the challenges they create, a lawmaker of the ruling party said in an interview. Fumiaki Kobayashi, a House of Representatives member who heads a project team on the issue, said the group aims to compile an interim proposal as early as July. The goal is to align Japanese company laws with global standards rather than “making Japan less welcoming to investments,” Kobayashi said. Shareholder activism has taken off in Japan amid a push by the Tokyo Stock Exchange for corporate governance reforms and a government drive to align company management and shareholder interests. Japan is now the world’s second-biggest market for public activist campaigns after the United States. Yet this has not been without pushback against what some companies see as opaque practices by some activists. The project team will discuss so-called “wolf pack” tactics, a strategy where investors act in concert while keeping their individual ownership stakes below disclosure thresholds, allowing them to build significant positions before their holdings are made public. This reflects a key concern that activists may be acting in cohort with private equity firms involved in management buyouts of companies that are being engaged by activists. The fear is that these funds may be pursuing their own interests rather than those of shareholders. “We want to actively welcome growth investment, and we want companies to pursue growth investment aggressively,” he said. “This is about creating the environment to make that possible.” The LDP panel will also consider measures to strengthen management capabilities as many companies are not in a position to adequately explain their medium- to long-term strategies when activists approach them with proposals, Kobayashi said. As one option, the team may ask the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry to create a checklist template that companies should use to proactively assess their own preparedness, he added. The project team will also discuss proposed revisions to the Companies Act currently under consideration in a separate government panel. Issues include tightening the requirements for exercising shareholder proposal rights and curbing shareholder proposals, Kobayashi said.

Read the article

6/17/2026

New Ferretti Head Rejects Claims of Breach of Italy Golden Power Rules

Reuters (06/17/26) Pollina, Elvira

The new head of Italian yacht-maker Ferretti (BIT: YACHT) on Wednesday rejected arguments from the company’s second-largest investor over an alleged breach of golden power rules designed to shield strategic assets following a shareholder vote last month that appointed a new board. Czech investor KKCG Maritime urged the Italian government to act in the wake of a feud that saw Ferretti shareholders side with China's Weichai Group (SZ: 000338) to end Alberto Galassi's 12-year tenure as CEO, replacing him with Stassi Anastassov. "The problem is not a fact-based problem. Nothing has really changed. I am as independent as the previous CEO was," said Anastassov, a former Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG) executive, during a press briefing in Milan. KKCG Maritime raised its stake in Ferretti to about 23%, aiming to confirm Galassi and reshape a board dominated by representatives of Weichai. The Chinese group has a 39.5% stake. Italy is investigating whether China-led investors breached golden power rules in place to protect strategic assets by not revealing their full shareholding to Italian authorities, three government officials have told Reuters. Anastassov said the company was not informed of any probe. "I am totally happy if there is an investigation because there is nothing and we would support any fact finding," he said. Anastassov also pointed out that the company has decided to shut down its small defense business in 2024 on the basis of a unanimous decision of the previous board. KKCG has said this division brought Ferretti within the scope of Italy's golden power rules. "We are not actively selling anything sensitive today," said the executive, adding that the company only has some maintenance contracts for patrol vessels it had delivered in the past remaining in place. "There is no order intake," he said.

Read the article

6/16/2026

Harwood Capital Pushing for M&C Saatchi Break-Up Builds Stake

City AM (06/16/26) Lyon, Ali

Harwood Capital has added to its stake in M&C Saatchi (LON: SAA) in a move that brings it a step closer to orchestrating a break-up of one of Britain’s best-known advertising companies. Harwood Capital now owns more than 8% of the eponymous agency founded by advertising tycoons Maurice and Charles in 1995, according to a stock exchange filing, and is understood to harbor ambitions to push through a mass disposal the media group’s constituent parts. The boutique investment firm began amassing a stake in the London-headquartered M&C Saatchi in 2020, but did not surpass the 5% threshold that forced it to declare its holding until last year. Since then, it has been steadily adding to its position, with its latest buying spree taking its stake above 8% for the first time. The fund is now pushing for the agency to kickstart a piecemeal sale of its various divisions – which range from lobbying and events management to traditional advertising and sports marketing – that it hopes will unlock significant value for shareholders. The approach resembles the playbook Harwood employed with Centaur Media, the former owner of trade media outlets like The Lawyer, that completed a fire sale of its portfolio companies earlier this year. Centaur now owns just one firm, having returned nearly £65 million to shareholders through the disposals under pressure from Harwood. The stripped back entity also quit the London Stock Exchange in April. Harwood’s offensive comes at a tumultuous period for M&C Saatchi, which has been forced to contend with a barrage of headwinds. The Aim-listed group’s shares have shed more than a more than a quarter of their valuation over the last 12 months, after the agency was swept up in a wider artificial intelligence-related sell-off of large advertising groups. Meanwhile, the Iran war has threatened to upend its industry-leading sport and entertainment division’s growth in the Middle East and further dent earnings in the already softening UK market. It has also faced several high-profile internal challenges, with former boss Zaid Al-Qassab standing down in April after less than two years at the helm. Major shareholder Vin Murria has simultaneously taken up a position on its board having previously spearheaded a £254 million hostile takeover approach for the agency. Any break-up would likely foreshadow the end of M&C Saatchi’s two-decade-long spell on London’s junior stock exchange, Aim, and mark the final chapter of one of Britain’s most recognized advertising agencies. It was founded in 1995 by Maurice and Charles Saatchi – along with several other senior colleagues – after the pair left their first agency Saatchi & Saatchi in an acrimonious boardroom spat.

Read the article

6/16/2026

Snap CEO Spiegel Defends Specs as Long-Term Bet, Pushes Back Against Irenic Capital Management Pressure

Reuters (06/16/26) Singh, Jaspreet; Soni, Aditya

Snap (SNAP.N) CEO Evan Spiegel told Reuters the company's new Specs augmented-reality glasses are part of its long-term strategy, pushing back on investor demands to shut down or spin off the cash-burning unit behind the device. The Snapchat parent launched the device, its first consumer AR glasses, on Tuesday at a price of $2,195 and pitched them as the future of how people interact with technology in the AI age. The launch comes months after Irenic Capital Management pushed Snap to consider options for Specs as part of a series of changes that the investor said could boost the social media company's worth by at least five times. Irenic has argued Specs should be funded on its own, noting Snap has already spent more than $3.5 billion on the unit. "While investors may want more short-term profitability, our job at Snap is to drive long-term profitability and the long-term success of the company," Spiegel said in an interview. "One of the things we've always been clear about as we've built Snap...was that we were committed to our long-term vision. And that includes staying independent rather than selling the company," he said. Spiegel said the company is expected to share "more later this year in terms of how we're thinking about partnerships over a longer period of time." The company carved out the unit as a standalone subsidiary in January, a structure that could let it raise outside funding.

Read the article

6/16/2026

Victoria’s Secret Investors Back Full Board After Proxy Battle

Retail Dive (06/16/26) James, Dani

Victoria’s Secret & Co. (NYSE: VSXY) shareholders voted to reelect all nine board director nominees the retailer put forward despite a proxy battle with BBRC International PTE Limited. Independent Chair Donna James was reelected with over 83% approval at the 2026 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, according to a company press release Thursday. The final voting results were filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Monday. “Today's outcome is a decisive statement of support for the current Board leadership from VS&Co's shareholders,” the intimates company said in a statement. “It also recognizes the substantial progress, outperformance and value creation delivered under the Path to Potential strategy and reaffirms shareholder confidence in our Board's continued oversight of that strategy.” BBRC filed a proxy statement to solicit votes against reelecting two independent Victoria’s Secret & Co. board directors — Donna James and Mariam Naficy — in May. The group, which is led by Brett Blundy, asserted James served an excessively long tenure and Naficy’s involvement in the acquisition of Adore Me was representative of poor capital allocation. Blundy partly achieved his goals in the proxy battle that ensued, with Naficy later deciding not to seek reelection. The company is conducting a search for a new director. Victoria’s Secret put forward a campaign to support the remaining directors, including James. The retailer also publicly released details of an extensive back-and-forth discussion with Blundy in the months leading up to the BBRC proxy battle wherein the company tried to find a solution to Blundy’s concerns. BBRC voted against all of the company’s board director nominees, except for CEO Hillary Super. Blundy previously said in a letter outlining the proxy fight that Super is “building a new” Victoria’s Secret and deserved a board suiting her goals. Victoria’s Secret previously dealt with BBRC in 2025 when the board adopted a poison pill in response to the “substantial accumulation” of Victoria’s Secret stock by BBRC.

Read the article

6/16/2026

GameStop Investor Brings Suit Over CEO’s $35 Billion Pay Package

Bloomberg (06/16/26) Willmer, Sabrina; Leonard, Michael

A GameStop Corp. (NYSE: GME) investor moved to halt a vote on a $35 billion pay package for the company’s chief executive officer until proper disclosures are made to shareholders. The lawsuit came in response to the board’s decision to grant CEO Ryan Cohen stock option awards that could lead to a multibillion-dollar windfall if certain aggressive milestones are met. Stockholders are set to vote on the pay package July 7. The proposed class action, filed in Delaware’s Chancery Court on Monday, says GameStop’s board repeatedly and illegally changed the procedures around the stockholder vote before issuing a misleading proxy statement aimed at suppressing the turnout by public investors. The changes included whether Cohen can vote his 9.3% stake and how to count abstentions. “GameStop’s audacious attempts to reduce the power of its disinterested shareholders — in contrast to its prior public statements and in disregard of its Certificate of Incorporation — must stop,” lawyers for the plaintiff wrote in the complaint. “Cohen may want $35 billion. That does not allow him and his board to disenfranchise stockholders and violate Delaware law along the way.” A GameStop spokesperson couldn’t immediately be reached for comment. Cohen initially invested in GameStop in 2020, producing one of the first “meme stocks.” He attracted attention for amassing a big stake in the struggling company and called it out for lagging behind the e-commerce trend. He joined the board in 2021 and later that year became chairman with a plan to turn around the company. Cohen then took the reins of the business in 2023 and is now the single largest stockholder. The proposed pay package would compensate Cohen with $35 billion if the company achieves a $100 billion market capitalization and $10 billion in earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization. Cohen was asked in an interview with CNBC about whether the pay package motivated him to make a $56 billion offer this year for eBay Inc., an e-commerce company almost four times the size of GameStop. “I obviously want to build something much larger, but I don’t benefit unless shareholders benefit,” Cohen said in the interview. eBay last month rejected the unsolicited bid, describing it as “neither credible nor attractive.” Monday’s lawsuit says the company issued a press release stating the vote would exclude Cohen’s shares and that “unaffiliated stockholders” would decide the result. But the board allegedly reversed course and issued a proxy statement that mischaracterized what it had done. The moves will disenfranchise stockholders by allowing Cohen and other insiders to determine the outcome virtually on their own, with only about 15% support from public investors, according to the complaint. “The company is actively lowering the incentive” for unhappy shareholders to “bother with the cost and burden of blocking the Award,” attorneys for the plaintiff wrote.

Read the article

6/15/2026

Palliser Urges Taiwan Firm WUS to Privatize, Lift Value

Bloomberg (06/15/26) Du, Lisa; Lin, Miaojung

Palliser Capital is urging Taiwanese company WUS Printed Circuit Co. (TPE: 2316) to enhance shareholder value, including through a potential privatization, according to documents viewed by Bloomberg News. UK-based Palliser has built a 4.3% stake in WUS Printed Circuit and says the firm is trading at a more than 70% discount to its net asset value, according to a June 1 letter sent to the company’s board from Palliser. The hedge fund is asking the Kaohsiung, Taiwan-based firm to create an independent committee to evaluate options for boosting value — including going private or selling off its equity stake in another printed circuit board company, the letter said. WUS Printed Circuit, valued at about $900 million at Friday’s close in Taiwan, produces complex circuit boards that are in high demand amid the AI-driven expansion of data center infrastructure. The company also holds an 11.3% stake in WUS Printed Circuit Kunshan Co. (SHE: 002463), a supplier of boards to Nvidia Corp. (NASDAQ: NVDA). Palliser described the Kunshan stake in its letter as a “hidden jewel,” estimating it to be worth more than three times WUS Printed Circuit’s current market value. WUS also received another public letter from Singapore-based Metrica Partners Pte. about valuation issues. Mandy Lu, a spokesperson for WUS, confirmed the letter from Palliser. She said the company will liaise with both investors this week and pledged to strengthen communication with shareholders. WUS Printed Circuit currently has no plans to go private, as the purpose of such a move remains unclear, she said, adding that the firm is open to discussions. The company also has no plans to sell its shares in WUS Printed Circuit Kunshan, as the two entities are long-term strategic partners.

Read the article

6/15/2026

Elliott Said to Take Almost 5% Stake in UK Distributor Bunzl

Bloomberg (06/15/26) Gopinath, Swetha

Elliott Investment Management LP has taken an almost 5% stake in Bunzl Plc (LON: BNZL), according to people familiar with the matter, after a profit warning last year sent the UK distributor’s shares tumbling. Elliott is calling on London-based Bunzl to repurchase shares equivalent to as much as 10% of its total market capitalization over the next 12 months, said the people, who asked not to be identified discussing confidential information. The investment firm is also urging the company to conduct a strategic review, with a focus on its North American business, its largest market, the people said. A more than three-decade streak of continual dividend growth helped the under-the-radar FTSE 100 Index constituent build a base of mostly long-term oriented investors. But a sudden profit warning last year aggravated a descent in the stock that has pushed the company’s market value down to £8.23 billion ($11 billion) from £12.6 billion in September 2024. Elliott wants Bunzl to deploy more of its free cash flow to step-up repurchases, after a recent slowdown in dealmaking activity as well as buybacks despite the slide in share prices, the people said. Bunzl bought back £200 million of its own shares through 2025, after repurchasing about £250 million in late 2024. Bunzl’s pace of acquisitions has also slowed, with the company completing eight transactions in 2025, down from 15 the previous year, according to its annual reports. The company’s North American business was behind last year’s profit warning, which it attributed to operational challenges. Bunzl has since announced leadership changes at the unit to improve its performance. Elliott believes separating the business, which operates independently and shares few synergies with the rest of the company, could help lift Bunzl’s valuation to a level more comparable with its competitors, which trade about 40% to 50% higher on a forward price-to-earnings basis, the people said. The distribution market in North America has attracted private equity interest from the likes of Advent, Bain Capital, Clayton Dubilier & Rice, and Warburg Pincus.

Read the article

6/15/2026

Ananym Capital Management Urges Bio-Techne to Consider Selling

Bloomberg (06/15/26) Sun, Mengqi

Ananym Capital Management has built a stake in Bio-Techne Corp. (NASDAQ: TECH) and is pushing the board to conduct a strategic review that would include a potential sale. Ananym said in a letter dated Monday to Bio-Techne’s board that the company has underperformed its peers in life-science tools as well as the broader market. A sale to a larger industry player would give more value to Bio-Techne than it can create as a standalone entity, according to the letter, which was reviewed by Bloomberg News. “While we are a new investor, shareholders have suffered for years as the company has continued to destroy value,” Ananym said in the letter. “A failure to act now risks further value destruction and even permanent capital impairment, which the board has a duty to avoid by exploring all potential paths to preserving and enhancing value.” A representative for Bio-Techne didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. Minneapolis-based Bio-Techne makes equipment for life-science research, diagnostics and bioprocessing. Shares of Bio-Techne have fallen 8.2% this year, giving the company a market value of $8.45 billion. Ananym said Bio-Techne has unique, high-quality assets and strong customer relationships, but its organic growth has trailed peers and its investments in adjacent areas have lowered its operating margins without adding to growth. The life science tools sector has faced consolidation for the past few years, and larger players have paid substantial amounts for the type of assets that Bio-Techne has, Ananym said in the letter. Ananym argued that a larger player would unlock synergies in cost, revenue and platform that aren’t available to Bio-Techne currently and provide resources and scale for growth. “Bio-Techne is one of the highest-quality assets remaining in the life sciences tools industry, with a portfolio highly complementary to the leading scaled platforms,” Ananym said in the letter. Ananym is also urging the Bio-Techne’s board to hire independent financial advisers and add new directors. New York-based Ananym was founded in 2024 by Chief Investment Officer Alex Silver, a former partner at P2 Capital Partners, and Head of Engagement Charlie Penner, a former partner at Jana Partners and a former head of shareholder activism at Engine No. 1. The fund currently manages about $350 million and Bio-Techne is one of its largest investments. The investor has launched campaigns against nuclear technology company BWX Technologies Inc. (NYSE: BWXT) in May, urging it to make commercial nuclear reactors, and German power equipment manufacturer Siemens Energy AG (ENR.DE) and energy technology company Baker Hughes Co. (NASDAQ: BKR).

Read the article

6/15/2026

Supreme Court Bars Activist Investors From Suing Funds Under Investor Law

InvestmentNews (06/15/26) Bongat, Carleen

Activist investors just lost a favorite tool. The Supreme Court says they cannot sue funds under one key piece of federal fund law. On June 11, 2026, the justices ruled that Section 47(b) of the Investment Company Act does not let private parties sue to undo contracts that allegedly break the Act. The fight pitted Saba, a prominent investor, against FS Credit Opportunities Corp. (NYSE: FSCO) and other closed-end fund managers. The ruling wiped out a win Saba had banked in the lower courts. Start with how we got here. Saba runs open-end funds and practices activist investing. It buys large stakes in underperforming closed-end funds, then pushes to reshape them or turn them into open-end funds. The FS funds are incorporated in Maryland, which has a law - the Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act - that lets funds curb the voting power of shareholders holding an outsized block of shares unless other shareholders approve. The FS funds opted into it. That choice takes the air out of an activist's leverage. In June 2023, Saba sued. It said the resolutions break the ICA's rule that every share carry equal voting rights. To get through the courthouse door, Saba relied on Section 47(b), which says a court "may not deny rescission" of a violating contract "at the instance of any party." Saba read that as a green light to sue. A District Court agreed and handed Saba summary judgment. The Second Circuit went along. The Supreme Court saw it differently. Justice Barrett, writing for the majority, said Section 47(b) talks to courts, not to people. It guides how a judge uses the power to unwind a deal once a party is already in front of the court asking for it. It does not, the Court held, create a right to sue from scratch. Justice Kagan and Justice Jackson dissented, with Justice Sotomayor joining Jackson. Structure backed that up. Congress made the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) the ICA's primary enforcer, with authority to investigate and bring cases. When Congress wanted private suits, it spelled them out - the Act carries two such rights already. A 1980 amendment that cut the old "shall be void" wording clinched the reading. What does this mean for the fund business? Enforcement of most ICA provisions flows through the SEC, not through private parties using Section 47(b). Closed-end funds fending off activist pressure gain a firmer defense. Activists lose a route they had used to attack takeover protections. Saba issued the following statement on the decision. Boaz Weinstein, founder and chief investment officer of Saba, said: "The Court did not rule that these closed-end fund managers followed the law. The Court ruled only that shareholders cannot sue fund managers for their illegal actions under one particular provision of the '40 Act. All today's opinion changes is that future legal challenges against entrenched fund managers will come in other forms. Saba will pursue every avenue available to defend shareholders' rights — including lawsuits under other provisions of the '40 Act and under state law. This decision puts the burden squarely on the SEC. Multiple federal and state courts have already ruled that investment managers violated the '40 Act by adopting control share provisions and vote-stripping bylaws. The SEC's own staff reached the same conclusion in its 2010 Boulder Letter. These are protections Congress wrote into law more than 80 years ago — they are not optional. The evidence of shareholder harm is overwhelming. The SEC has no excuse not to act." The case now heads back to the lower courts.

Read the article

6/12/2026

Uber Weighs Delivery Hero Asset Sales to Smooth Full Takeover

Bloomberg (06/12/26) Henning, Eyk; Prinsloo, Loni; Chan, Vinicy

Uber Technologies Inc. (NYSE: UBER) is reaching out to parties interested in Delivery Hero SE’s regional businesses as it works toward a takeover of the German food delivery company that would get regulatory approval, people with knowledge of the matter said. The U.S. technology group has been sounding out companies that could potentially buy Delivery Hero (DHER.DE) assets in overlapping regions within Latin America, Asia and Europe, according to one of the people. The deliberations show that Uber is making progress in its pursuit of a full takeover of Delivery Hero, having built its stake in the Frankfurt-listed group to around 36.8%, including instruments, in recent months. A transaction would likely require regulatory approvals in multiple jurisdictions and regional asset sales lined up in advance could help smooth the process. Any sales would come after any takeover of Delivery Hero was completed. Uber wants to acquire Delivery Hero to boost food delivery outside its U.S. home market and better compete with DoorDash Inc. (NASDAQ: DASH). It’s already made a €33 ($38)-a-share bid for the company but investors have been betting that a higher price will be required to seal a deal. Discussions are ongoing and no decisions on asset sales or a full takeover have been made, the people said, asking not to be identified discussing confidential information. Representatives for Uber and Delivery Hero declined to comment. Bloomberg News reported previously that DoorDash is interested in a deal for Delivery Hero’s operations in the Middle East, which include the listed Talabat Holding Plc (TALABAT.AE) business. Meanwhile, Riyadh-based quick delivery startup Ninja this week submitted an indicative offer for Delivery Hero’s Saudi Arabia unit, HungerStation, a person familiar with the matter said. Ninja has also expressed interest in parts of Talabat, the person said. A representative for Ninja didn't immediately respond to a request for comment outside regular Saudi business hours. Prosus NV (PRX.AS), the Amsterdam-listed Internet investment firm that holds roughly 16.8% of Delivery Hero, has been selling down its stake in the German company to resolve European antitrust concerns linked to its acquisition of Just Eat Takeaway last year. Prosus recently asked the EU to drop this requirement.

Read the article

6/11/2026

Victoria's Secret Shareholders Side With Board Over Investor

Columbus Business First (06/11/26) Eaton, Dan

An investor’s attempt to oust a longtime Victoria’s Secret (NYSE: VSXY) board member has failed. The Reynoldsburg-based retailer held its annual meeting Thursday, and Chairwoman Donna James was re-elected with more than 83% of shareholder votes. Victoria’s Secret has been in a multi-year fight with Australian billionaire and merchant Brett Blundy and his investment firm, BBRC International PTE Ltd., which is the second-largest shareholder in the business with approximately 13% of the stock. The two sides had a public back-and-forth for a year – the latest iteration of which involved BBRC lobbying for shareholders to vote against James and board member Mariam Naficy. Naficy did decide to not seek re-election. James, whose board tenure goes back to 2001 and across two other entities, received 99% of the votes. That tally did not count the BBRC votes, the company noted. All nine directors were re-elected with at least 81% of shareholder support. BBRC voted against eight of the nine directors. CEO Hillary Super was the only one to receive that firm’s support. Victoria’s Secret noted that board members received at least 96% shareholder approval not counting the BBRC votes. That firm expressed interest in acquiring Victoria’s Secret in 2021 while it was still part of L Brands Inc. The brand spun off as its own standalone business in August of that year. BBRC first acquired stock in the company in 2022 and began advocating for changes behind the scenes, including Blundy's push for a board seat. One of its arguments against James has been the stock performance since BBRC first invested in 2022. BBRC said the company underperformed on the S&P 500 Consumer Discretionary Distribution & Retail Index in that timeframe. Victoria’s Secret has countered that in the time since Super was hired in 2024, the retailer is outperforming the index. The CEO is leading a turnaround. The retailer, which was struggling at the turn of the decade, has seen sales rebound in the past two years. Sales in 2026 are projected to surpass $7 billion – a mark it hasn’t hit since 2019. Super spoke to Columbus Business First this month about the across-the-board success it has seen of late. The company, in a statement Thursday, said the shareholder vote affirms the current business strategy and that the company remains poised for long-term success. Victoria’s Secret has 1,420 stores in 70 countries. The business also includes the Pink and Adore Me brands.

Read the article

6/11/2026

Japan Governance Reforms Set to Prise Open $1.8 Trillion Cash Hoard

Reuters (06/11/26) Nussey, Sam; Uranaka, Miho; Bridge, Anton

Proposed revisions to Japan's governance code that stress the need for efficient use of cash have raised expectations among investors that corporate hoarders will start to mobilize their $1.8 trillion money mountain. The revisions, to be finalized in the summer, could see companies return more cash to shareholders or redeploy it for deal-making or growth investment, building on reforms over the past decade that have helped share prices reach record highs. Makita (6586.T) set out its cash allocation policy explicitly for the first time this year, saying it will hold cash and cash equivalents at two to three months of sales, with excess funds to be used for shareholder returns and investment. The tool maker pledged to return 50% or more of profit to shareholders and took into account the evolving governance code and requests from institutional investors, said Ryota Maruyama of Makita's general affairs department. "We recognize we are required to communicate with the market regarding the use of capital," he said. The governance reforms, from the Financial Services Agency and Tokyo Stock Exchange, come as firms have hoarded cash, a hangover from the bursting of the asset bubble in the early 1990s and the decades of deflation that followed. Now, higher inflation rates are eating into the value of corporate cash mountains. "Companies need to be more aggressive, and sitting on excessive cash is no longer acceptable," said CLSA Securities strategist Nicholas Smith. "If companies don't get their share prices up they are much more vulnerable than they used to be - not only to activists but also to acquisition by other companies," he also said. Companies still do not have sufficient discussions regarding capital allocation, said Kaz Sakai, head of Japan research at London-based Asset Value Investors. "Rather than a simple dichotomy of whether to hold cash or invest, strategic capital allocation is required," he said. Mizuki Suma, head of the legal and corporate governance team at Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Bank, said interviews of some 30 companies found growing recognition of the need for debate of capital allocation at board level. Bankers expect the governance changes to support strong M&A momentum in Japan. "As Japanese companies look to utilize their excess cash balances ... we expect companies to look at M&A with targets which are strategic and accretive," said Manoj Jain, co-founder of hedge fund Maso Capital. "We have definitely found the willingness recently for Japanese corporates to divest to be unprecedented," said Ellis Chu, head of Asia mergers and acquisitions at Jefferies. "It's having a seismic effect on sell side M&A activity," he said. Activists, which are increasingly prominent in Japan, are already using the revisions to increase pressure on companies to utilize cash. London-based Palliser Capital in April urged SMC Corp (6273.T) to buy back $3.8 billion worth of shares. "SMC would demonstrate leadership in disciplined excess cash deployment ahead of the anticipated revisions to Japan's corporate governance code," Palliser told the factory automation firm. Companies face a record number of activist proposals at shareholder meetings this year, while institutional investors are also more willing to vote against management than in the past. Still, before the revision is even finalized, war in the Middle East has upended businesses, disrupting supply chains and pushing up energy costs. Toilet maker Toto (5332.T) in April said it was postponing plans to use more cash for investment or to buy back shares. "We will keep funds readily available so we can move quickly and inject capital when needed," said President Shinya Tamura, at Toto, which also makes chip-making materials. Market watchers also emphasize the limitations of governance reforms alone. "There are limits to what you can do with moral suasion and soft law," said CLSA's Smith. "Unless you take away their tax breaks it's very difficult to force companies to do the right thing."

Read the article

6/11/2026

Northern Star Investor Steps Up Pressure for Major Changes

Australian Financial Review (06/11/26) Wembridge, Mark

Northern Star Resources’ (ASX: NST) under-fire board underestimates the scale of its troubles and must be open to all options, including a full sale, according to the hedge fund engaging the embattled gold miner. Elliott Investment Management said the miner’s board, led by Michael Chaney, “does not understand the magnitude of change required to win back shareholders’ trust,” and that a boardroom revamp was required. The Florida-based hedge fund said Northern Star’s admission that it had underperformed during a period of booming gold prices validated its decision to agitate for change. Elliott bought a 4% stake in Northern Star worth more than $1 billion, in a campaign to encourage the ASX’s largest Australian-based gold miner to lift its game. Northern Star’s shares have fallen by one-quarter this year, including a horror month when $17 billion of shareholder value was erased after it revealed the latest in a series of production downgrades. Managing Director Stuart Tonkin will leave the company later this year after being shown the door by the board, with Chaney’s leadership since coming under the spotlight. Meanwhile, rivals such as Evolution Mining (ASX: EVN), Greatland Resources (ASX: GGP), and Westgold Resources (ASX: WGX) are filling their coffers thanks to historically high gold prices. “The [Northern Star] board has formally acknowledged the company’s underperformance, disclosed it has received multiple inbound approaches from potential acquirers over the past year, and confirmed that its own financial advisers have modeled structural alternatives, including a spin-off of assets,” Elliott said. Given that backdrop, “the case for a strategic review is now more apparent than it was before the board published its letter,” Elliott said. “Whatever path Northern Star takes next, its board must be equipped to oversee the process, and the market must have confidence in its credibility and rigor.” The fund said Northern Star’s shares had underperformed VanEck’s Gold Miners ETF (NYSEARCA: GDX) by 70 percentage points in the 12 months to June 1, “starkly illustrating the value these strategic alternatives might have unlocked." The miner on Wednesday acknowledged that it was “happy to engage” with Elliott to counter its underperformance, which it attributed to mechanical failures at its flagship Super Pit in Kalgoorlie and operational headaches. But Chaney, who confirmed at last year’s shareholder meeting that he would quit as chairman in November, rejected Elliott’s calls to start a sale process for the company because the board did “not consider that this is the right time to do so." Other options tabled by Elliott include the sale of non-core assets thought to include Northern Star’s Yandal hub, which covers the Thunderbox, Bronzewing and Jundee mines. Chaney also rejected this suggestion, although the ASX boardroom veteran agreed with the fund that Northern Star needed more directors with hands-on mining experience. “I share the view of our shareholders, including Elliott, that Northern Star’s share price is discounted relative to our assessment of the company’s underlying value,” Chaney said. Northern Star shares fell 1.2% on Thursday to $18.31, giving the miner a market value of $26.2 billion – down from a peak of $44 billion in March. Gold dropped to its lowest level since November after falling below $US4,200 an ounce overnight. It peaked above $US5,500 in January. Northern Star has pinned its expansion hopes on the Hemi project in WA’s Pilbara, an undeveloped deposit that is thought to hold at least 5.5 million ounces of gold reserves. However, gold will not be extracted from Hemi until at least 2030.

Read the article

6/11/2026

LSEG Slowly Sheds 'AI Risk' Tag With Drive to Show Growth

Reuters (06/11/26) Indyk, Samuel

London Stock Exchange Group's (LSEG.L) public push to shed its tag as a likely loser to AI technology is starting to convince some shareholders and lift its share price. LSEG shares tumbled nearly 13% in one day in February as worries about the threat posed by large language artificial intelligence models like Anthropic's Claude triggered a sharp selloff in software stocks. The market is now coming around to the idea that the impact on pricing for LSEG's products and market share for its data business may be less severe than previously thought, five analysts and investors told Reuters. Since Elliott Management was reported in early February to have begun building what it has called a "significant stake" in the company, the share price has risen 27%, although it remains 23% below a peak hit in 2025. And while it's too early to call LSEG an AI winner, UBS (NYSE: UBS) last month removed it from a basket of companies it believed could be disrupted by the new technology. Reuters couldn't ascertain the reason for UBS' decision. LSEG will have to demonstrate that it can generate enough revenue from its own AI initiatives, UBS analyst Michael Werner said: "There is still a 'show me' story (for AI). It's one thing to have usage, it's another to start charging people." The share price rally could give LSEG CEO David Schwimmer more time and support to pursue his strategy for the financial data and analytics heavyweight and close a valuation gap. Some investors and analysts have called for "value-enhancing" actions, among them increasing a £3 billion ($4 billion) stock buyback program announced in February and even spinning off the London Stock Exchange, which LSEG operates. LSEG shares trade at about 18 times forward earnings, a discount to Moody's (MCO.N) of about 30% and MSCI (MSCI.N) of around 40%, although it trades at a premium to U.S.-listed data and analytics business FactSet (FDS.N). "It's actually pretty cheap compared to other data companies," Deutsche Bank analyst Benjamin Goy said. Of 20 analysts covering LSEG, 90% rate the stock either a 'buy' or a 'strong buy' and none have a 'sell' rating. On average, analysts expect LSEG's shares to rise by 35% over the next 12 months, based on their target prices. LSEG has outperformed Britain's blue-chip FTSE 100, which is little changed since Elliott called for more action, while London-listed software and data providers Experian (EXPN.L) and Sage (SGE.L) are up 5% and 2%, respectively. Asked for comment about its performance, LSEG pointed to previous statements that it has made "great strides" embedding AI into its Workspace news and data platform. Analysts said investor perceptions had changed after LSEG's full-year results on February 26, when it gave details about its Model Context Protocol (MCP) server, which feeds some proprietary datasets to third-party AI agents and LLMs. At its first-quarter trading update in April, LSEG continued to flag growth and revenue opportunities from the MCP server. It cited "strong uptake," with over 90 customers connected and a pipeline of 60 more, while its total first-quarter income was up 9.8%, its strongest performance in more than five years. "They have stepped up in their communication, their disclosure, in terms of how they are part of the AI ecosystem rather than competing against it," said Hubert Lam, head of European speciality finance equity research at BofA Global Research. Elliott, which Reuters previously reported had been pushing LSEG to improve its communication around the AI threat, declined to comment on its investment. Lindsell Train, a top-five LSEG shareholder, said in March that it had been adding to its position. Nick Train, who manages the group's UK equity portfolios, said in a note in May that the decline in shares of London-listed data, software and platform companies could offer a "once-in-a-decade opportunity to access exceptional growth assets at fundamentally the wrong price." Another top-30 shareholder, who also recently added to their position, said there was an opportunity for investors who believe the market is underpricing the value of intellectual property. Investors still see threats from AI technology. "I don't believe the risk (of disruption from AI) is minimal," said Stephen Yiu, chief investment officer of the Blue Whale Growth Fund, which holds a small stake in LSEG. He said that to become an AI winner, the company might need to slim down and focus on its core business. The rollout and delivery of LSEG's 10-year partnership with Microsoft (MSFT.O) has also disappointed some investors, Reuters previously reported. That partnership is now less likely to drive the equity story than when it was announced in December 2022, UBS's Werner said. Expectations of the tie-up have declined and investor focus has shifted to how LSEG will perform in an environment of increasing AI adoption among its client base, he said. Most recently LSEG has been caught up in a fight over UK plans for an equities "tape" that could threaten LSEG's data business, by publishing data that LSEG charges investors for.

Read the article

6/11/2026

Victoria’s Secret & Co. Shareholders Decisively Re-Elect All Nine Company Director Nominees

Global News Wire (06/11/26)

Victoria’s Secret & Co. (NYSE: VSXY) today announced that, based on the preliminary voting results at the Company’s 2026 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, shareholders voted to re-elect all nine of Victoria's Secret director nominees, including Independent Chair Donna James, to the Company’s Board of Directors. The preliminary results indicate James received the approval of over 99% of the votes cast, excluding the votes cast by BBRC International Pte Limited (BBRC), which waged a proxy contest against the re-election of James and voted against all Company director nominees other than CEO Hillary Super. As a percentage of all votes cast, James was re-elected with over 83% approval. Each of the Company’s other director nominees received the approval of at least 96% of the votes cast excluding votes cast by BBRC, or at least 81% of all votes cast. Victoria's Secret issued the following statement: “We thank shareholders for their overwhelming support in electing all nine of the Company’s director nominees. Today’s outcome is a decisive statement of support for the current Board leadership from Victoria's Secret’s shareholders. It also recognizes the substantial progress, outperformance and value creation delivered under the Path to Potential strategy and reaffirms shareholder confidence in our Board's continued oversight of that strategy. With strong momentum across the business, including recent first quarter 2026 results that significantly exceeded top- and bottom-line guidance, we are confident Victoria's Secret is well positioned for long-term success. We appreciate the engagement and support of our shareholders and remain focused on executing our Path to Potential strategy and building on the progress we have achieved to date.” The results announced today, as summarized in this press release, are considered preliminary and subject to change until the final voting results are tabulated and certified by the independent inspector of election. Victoria's Secret & Co. will report the final voting results on a Form 8-K that will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Read the article

6/10/2026

Northern Star Admits to Takeover Bids Amid Elliott Investment Management Pressure

Australian Financial Review (06/10/26) Wembridge, Mark

Under fire gold miner Northern Star Resources (ASX: NST) has admitted that its dismal share price performance sparked multiple takeover or merger approaches over the past year, and agreed with Elliott Investment Management’s criticism that it needs to lift its game. However, the ASX’s biggest Australian-headquartered gold miner rejected the suggestion by hedge fund Elliott Investment Management that it should be sold, saying that retaining assets was the better option for shareholders. Northern Star Chairman Michael Chaney on Wednesday broke his silence following last week’s revelation that Elliott had built a 4% stake in the miner worth more than $1 billion and was agitating for change. In a scathing letter, United States-based Elliott noted the miner’s “worst-in-class total shareholder returns and a steep valuation discount, repeated guidance misses and operational failures, a lack of leadership credibility and talent exodus, and cost overruns." Elliott suggested selling underperforming assets, a fresh boardroom-led turnaround, or a full sale of the company to the likes of South Africa’s Gold Fields (NYSE: GFI), Canada’s Agnico Eagle (NYSE: AEM), or U.S. miners AngloGold Ashanti (NYSE: AU), and Newmont (NYSE: NEM). In response, Chaney acknowledged that Northern Star’s shares had “not met our expectations, and we recognize shareholders’ concern." “Shareholders we speak to agree with that and are expecting the value of the company to be reflected properly in the share price.” Northern Star’s stock has fallen by one-quarter this year, underperforming rivals amid soaring gold prices. Its shares fell 3.5% on Wednesday to $18.54. Chaney said the miner had acceded to Elliott’s demand to appoint directors with mining experience to its boardroom, noting that the company was “happy to engage” with the fund on any suggestions that could deliver value. The miner has engaged an international search firm to find a replacement for outgoing managing director Stuart Tonkin, who was shown the door without a solid succession plan in place. The miner said it had interviewed internal and external candidates. Regarding Elliott’s pressure to run a sale process for the entire company, Chaney said the board did “not consider that this is the right time to do so." “We are always open to serious approaches from outside parties, and you will not be surprised to learn that given our share price underperformance over the last year, Northern Star has been approached by several companies about considering various corporate combinations,” he said. “Those discussions did not proceed because they were not in shareholders’ best interests.” Chaney, who is also chairman of conglomerate Wesfarmers, confirmed the board had considered spinning off some mines but decided against any sale, adding that the assets would “remain under regular review." “I share the view of our shareholders, including Elliott, that Northern Star’s share price is discounted relative to our assessment of the company’s underlying value,” said Chaney, who will stand down as chairman at the miner’s annual meeting in November. Deputy Chairman Michael Ashforth, a former investment banker, is a possible replacement for Chaney. While most of its rivals have taken fuller advantage of the soaring bullion price, Northern Star has been dogged by mechanical problems at its flagship Super Pit in Kalgoorlie and a series of operational headaches. Investors rounded on Tonkin after he waited a month to report that a vital mechanical crusher was broken, and that gold production would be as much as one-fifth lower than earlier forecasts. The miner’s $1.7 billion project to double annual production at its Kalgoorlie mill has been hit by delays and blowouts, although Chaney said the cost overrun was “modest in comparison to other major Australian projects." Elliott has a record of encouraging companies to change direction, including its 2017 high-profile campaign that pushed mining giant BHP (NYSE: BHP) to collapse its dual-class share structure.

Read the article

6/10/2026

Biotech Company Shareholders Elect Chris Christie in Rejecting Doma Perpetual Capital Management LLC's Slate

San Francisco Business Times (06/10/26) Leuty, Ron

A Peninsula drug company's shareholders turned back Doma Perpetual Capital Management LLC's challenge Tuesday, voting to elect three company-supported directors, including Chris Christie, the former New Jersey governor and onetime Republican presidential candidate. Shareholders of Pacira BioSciences Inc. (Nasdaq: PCRX) elected Christie, longtime drug entrepreneur Thomas Wiggans and former Bristol-Myers Squibb Co (NYSE: BMY) Chief Medical Officer Dr. Samit Hirawat to the Brisbane pain-treatment company's board of directors, it said Tuesday. Leaders of Miami hedge fund Doma Perpetual Capital Management LLC had pushed shareholders to elect its trio to force Pacira management to halt acquisitions, sell the company, and return capital to shareholders. Pacira, which sells the injectable, long-acting, nonopioid local anesthetic Exparel, and Doma had exchanged volleys in a monthslong proxy battle. At stake were Pacira's cash, equivalents and investments totaling $202.2 million. DOMA owns about 7.5% of Pacira's outstanding shares. The hedge fund had nominated Doma Chief Financial Officer Eric de Armas, psychiatrist Christopher Dennis and Oliver "Ben" Curtis III, a former federal prosecutor who advises on regulatory enforcement and more. Two independent proxy advisory firms, Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. and Glass, Lewis & Co., recommended shareholders vote for Pacira's director nominees. Pacira, led since early 2024 by former Genentech Inc. and Forma Therapeutics executive Frank Lee, has beefed up its product lineup with osteoarthritis treatment Zilretta and the handheld device Iovera, which uses cold temperature to temporarily block nerve signals for up to three months, through acquisitions. The company's experimental gene therapy, PCRX-101, or enekinragene inzadenovec, is in a mid-stage clinical trial to treat osteoarthritis of the knee. The therapy is billed as a genetic fix for what's known as the IL-1 pathway, which triggers knee inflammation, joint degeneration and pain in response to bodily invaders and cellular stress. Pacira had 829 employees at the end of last year.

Read the article

6/10/2026

Australian Billionaire Brett Blundy Wages High-Stakes Campaign to Oust Chair of Victoria’s Secret

The Guardian (06/10/26) Ittimani, Luca; Barrett, Jonathan

Australian billionaire Brett Blundy is waging a high-stakes campaign to oust the long-term chair of Victoria’s Secret & Co (NYSE: VSXY), setting the stage for a showdown at the company’s annual meeting in the United States on Thursday. Blundy’s investment firm, BBRC International, owns about 13% of the US-listed Victoria’s Secret lingerie brand, making it the second-biggest single shareholder and giving it a potential platform to launch a hostile takeover. The Monaco-based Australian is also chair of the Lovisa (ASX: LOV) jewellery brand, founder of the Léays lingerie stores and former owner of the Bras N Things and Honey Birdette brands. BBRC is seeking the removal of long-term chair Donna James from the board after a years-long battle over the company’s strategy and its decision not to appoint him as a director. Blundy, who has a net wealth of $4.5 billion according to the AFR’s rich list, has been pushing for changes at the company since about 2021 and has unsuccessfully sought a position on the board. He went public with his concerns in May, when he asked fellow Victoria’s Secret shareholders to get rid of the chair and another director, Mariam Naficy. Naficy has since decided not to stand for re-election. BBRC did not respond to questions from Guardian Australia. Blundy has previously said he was concerned the board was not focused on shareholders’ interest as directors were not heavily invested in the company, according to a letter filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. He has argued shareholders have “suffered years of value destruction, misallocated capital and anti-stockholder governance.” Blundy has also claimed James’s long tenure has affected independent oversight. The vote will be held at the company’s annual general meeting at 8.30am eastern time, Thursday (10.30pm AEST). The board of the lingerie and beauty company said it rejected Blundy’s past requests to be on the board due to “significant reputational risk” threatened by his involvement in Lovisa and Honey Birdette. Lovisa is defending a class action alleging it directed staff to work overtime without compensation. In 2016, Honey Birdette described reports it demanded sexist dress codes and vulgar language from employees as “mistruths.” In a note to shareholders, Victoria’s Secret also alleged one of Blundy’s “most trusted advisors” at BBRC visited numerous stores and falsely claimed to work with the company so he could take confidential sales information. BBRC disputed the characterization of the man’s conduct but said it had destroyed any materials referenced in agreement with the company. Such is the acrimony between the parties, the lingerie company has used a “poison pill” to ward off any attempt by Blundy to launch a hostile takeover. Under the plan, existing shareholders would be given the opportunity to buy more shares if Blundy – or any other investor – acquired a stake in excess of 15%. The strategy is designed to dilute the shareholding of a hostile bidder building a large stake. Three proxy advisory firms, Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS), Glass Lewis & Co and Egan-Jones Proxy Services, have thrown their support behind the board, arguing they are in the best position to increase shareholder value. While ISS acknowledged Blundy’s concerns over the long tenure of James, and the business’s initial poor performance after being spun off from its former parent company, L Brands, in 2021, it has advised against voting out the chair. The proxy firm, which advises large shareholders, says while the lingerie company “stumbled out of the gate” after being spun off, performance has since turned around. “In light of these and other considerations, the dissident has not presented a compelling case for the chair to be removed,” ISS says. The company’s recent strong performance could prove to be a significant hurdle to Blundy’s attempt to change the board, given Victoria’s Secret shares are up more than 50% over the past month, quelling any investor angst. Analysts have attributed some of the recent strong performance to the company's decision to re-establish its brand as a high-end name for wealthy shoppers and luxury purchases by curbing discounting. Victoria's Secret is also leaning into its past by recently reinstating its well-known annual fashion show after a six-year break. On June 2, its U.S. stock market ticker changed from “VSCO” to “VSXY,” in a nod to the company's renewed focus on sexy branding.

Read the article

6/9/2026

BP Investors Push for Clarity Over Ousting of Chair

Financial Times (06/09/26) Moore, Malcolm; Livsey, Alan; Armstrong, Ashley; et al.

Top BP (LON: BP) investors and former executives are concerned the UK oil major may lose momentum over the aggressive cost-cutting and restructuring plan driven by former chair Albert Manifold before his abrupt exit last month. Shareholders told the FT they remained in the dark about the precise circumstances that led to the departure of the 63-year-old Irish executive, and some feared his strategy had made enemies inside an organization that was resistant to his changes. “He was aggressively instituting change and that made the bureaucracy uncomfortable,” said one leading investor. “Were people trying to get him out of the door? That is our and many other investors’ concern.” Manifold was hired last year to shake up BP and planned to simplify and sell off large parts of the energy major, overhaul the company’s board of directors and cut costs. In a statement after his departure, in which he took aim at the company’s culture of “excessive expenditure,” including chauffeurs, private jets and corporate tickets to sporting events, Manifold said “it felt to me that my priorities were not always shared by everyone." BP said Manifold was fired for “unacceptable conduct,” with some people close to the company alleging that his behavior at times amounted to “bullying.” Manifold has described the claims as “lies." Per Lekander, founder of hedge fund manager Clean Energy Transition, said BP had been “a reasonably mismanaged kingdom for the past 30 years." “Culture tends to be one of the most stable things in an organization,” Lekander added. “Of course, when someone tries to do something about it, when you start a row in the kingdom, the king or the princes object to it.” Investors who spoke to BP said the oil group had pledged to continue with Manifold’s strategy of simplifying the company, but added that they would like further clarity. “Details were limited, given both the timely nature of the meeting and the sensitivity of aspects of the allegations,” said Stuart Riddick, senior sustainable investment manager at Aberdeen, who spoke with the company shortly after Manifold’s departure. Riddick said the asset manager “would like to know more about the governance standards and oversight issues cited by the board." At the time of Manifold’s sacking, BP’s interim chair Ian Tyler said the board had “deep conviction” in the strategy advanced by Manifold and was “moving at pace to deliver it." The controversy has reopened longstanding questions about BP’s corporate culture. One former BP executive, who said they had no direct knowledge of what had transpired, suggested that it was possible Manifold’s enemies had lobbied against him. “That place was always a nest of vipers,” they said. One person close to BP said the company had been unable to give full details of Manifold’s dismissal because it has a duty of care towards the staff who complained about the former chair. “Everyone wants the color, and the company will not give it because it would not be fair to the complainants,” they said. A person close to Manifold previously suggested that BP company secretary Ben Mathews, one of the longest-standing senior figures at the oil major, had been a “driver” of BP’s decision to remove Manifold. Mathews has taken time off since Manifold was ousted, after having dealt with the departures of both previous chair Helge Lund and Manifold in rapid succession. Tyler has declined to comment on specific employees or situations, beyond reiterating they removed Manifold for “unacceptable conduct." Matthew Lofting, an analyst at JPMorgan (NYSE: JPM), wrote in a note on Friday that he had met BP chief executive Meg O’Neill and that her “overarching message was that the chair has necessarily changed, but [BP’s] strategic direction hasn’t." BP laid out its current plan in February 2025, before Manifold’s arrival at the company, and has so far cut $2.8 billion of costs, against an initial target of $4 billion to $5 billion by 2027. Elliott, which took a near-5% stake in the oil major, has urged the company to go further, and in March BP increased its target to $6.5 billion to $7.5 billion of cuts. A spokesperson for BP said: “We remain firmly focused on cost discipline and delivering value for our shareholders.” One investor said the recent boardroom upheaval would keep BP under scrutiny, making any backsliding difficult, as “cost would have been front and center of Meg’s appointment." Other investors said governance concerns were outweighed by the windfall the company was reaping from high oil prices. “It’s less consequential who is in the chairman role,” said Brian Kersmanc at GQG Partners, which increased its shareholding in the wake of Manifold’s departure. “People are so myopically focused on what’s happening within the board that they are missing the forest for the trees. If oil stays anywhere near $100 a barrel in terms of pricing, the free cash flow these guys are going to generate is going to be off the charts,” he added. “At the end of the day, we vote with our shares. If we see the business is heading in a different direction, we’ll change course.”

Read the article

6/9/2026

3D Investment Partners: Leading Proxy Advisory Firm Glass Lewis Recommends Toho Holdings Shareholders Vote “AGAINST” the Proposed Poison Pill

BusinessWire (06/09/26)

3D Investment Partners Pte. Ltd., who provides discretionary investment management services to an investment fund which is a shareholder of Toho Holdings Co., Ltd. (TSE: 8129), announced that Glass, Lewis & Co., a leading independent provider of proxy research and voting recommendations for the institutional investor community, has recommended that shareholders of Toho HD vote AGAINST Proposal 4 (Gratis allotment of stock acquisition rights — the “Poison Pill Proposal”) at the Company’s 78th Annual General Meeting (AGM) of Shareholders, scheduled to be held on June 26, 2026. In its report, Glass Lewis determined that the Poison Pill “raises substantial governance concerns” and “may not appear to be in shareholders’ best interests at this time.” In reaching its conclusion, Glass Lewis highlighted that Toho HD provided “insufficient rationale” for adopting the Poison Pill and noted that the Poison Pill “does not appear appropriately proportionate to the circumstances.” In making its recommendation, Glass Lewis raised concerns to the following effect: Glass Lewis pointed to the adoption of the response policy without prior shareholder approval and to the breadth of the information requirements imposed on 3D. Glass Lewis questioned the persuasiveness of the Company's concerns, recognizing 3D's responses—including its proposal to voluntarily cap its ownership and its efforts to comply with the Company's procedures—as constructive. Glass Lewis noted that 3D’s disclosures appeared more comprehensive and transparent than the Company’s more limited disclosures, and that some investors may view 3D’s explanations as comparatively more credible. 3D remains deeply concerned that the approval of the invocation of the Poison Pill will entrench management at a time when greater accountability is urgently needed. Notably, after 3D shared court records suggesting potential executive involvement in systemic bid-rigging, the Board ceased communication and unilaterally introduced the Pill. At the time of adoption, substantially independent directors made up only 33% of the Board—falling short of METI's guidelines desiring a majority—a deficiency that persists even after the June AGM. This structural failure is further evidenced by deteriorating performance: Toho HD’s ROE has declined since FY2024 and now trails the peer median, its stock has materially underperformed industry peers since the Poison Pill was introduced, and its May 13 results fell well below analyst consensus. Despite all this, the new medium-term plan largely recycles targets from the prior, underachieved plan. 3D is concerned that the endorsement of the invocation of the Poison Pill may further weaken the managerial discipline that shareholders rely on to drive long-term value creation.

Read the article

6/9/2026

Capital Group Raises KT&G Stake to 7.2%

Korea Herald (06/09/26) Hyeong-woo, Kan

Capital Group has upped its stake in KT&G (KRX: 033780) to 7.21% as the latter continues to attract foreign investors. According to KT&G’s regulatory filing on Tuesday, Capital Research and Management Company, a wholly-owned investment arm of the Capital Group, acquired about 1.6 million extra shares of KT&G as of May 29. The additional investment came a little over three weeks after it had acquired a 5.61% stake in the Korean cigarette maker. Capital Group is one of the world's largest asset managers, managing more than $3 trillion in assets worldwide. KT&G logged 1.7 trillion won ($1.1 billion) in sales and 364.5 billion won in operating profit in the first quarter this year, up 14.3% and 27.6%, respectively, from the same period last year. In particular, the company posted record-setting 559.6 billion won in overseas sales, up 24.6% on year, on the back of balanced growth across the globe. KT&G plans to announce new shareholder return policies in the second half, based on growth driven by global sales. “Following BlackRock (NYSE: BLK), global financial companies that are long-term investment-oriented, such as Capital Group, are consecutively acquiring stakes (in KT&G) and recognizing our company’s fundamental competitiveness,” said a KT&G official. “We will continue to strengthen our shareholder value by increasing profits centered around global businesses and setting up a positive cycle of shareholder returns in the future.”

Read the article

6/9/2026

Ancora Builds Stake in Ashland, Pushes for Sale

Reuters (06/09/26) Herbst-Bayliss, Svea

Ancora Alternatives has built a significant stake in Ashland Inc (ASH.N) and wants the U.S. specialty chemicals company to sell itself, arguing that a transaction could boost its share price by at least 30%, according to a presentation reviewed by Reuters. The Cleveland-headquartered hedge fund said it is ready to launch a proxy fight at the Wilmington, Delaware-based company if there is not tangible progress toward reaching a deal by the time the window to nominate directors opens in September. Ashland's share price jumped more than 6% on Tuesday afternoon to trade at $61.12 as investors reacted to Ancora's presentation. Ancora began building its stake when the stock price dropped in April after Ashland, whose customers include L'Oreal (EPA: OR), Estee Lauder (EL.N), and Pfizer (PFE.N), reported disappointing fiscal second-quarter earnings. Net income was lower and earnings per share missed Wall Street's forecasts. ince hitting a high in December 2022, Ashland's stock price has tumbled roughly 50% as investors punish the company by valuing the whole at less than its standalone business segments would be valued, Ancora said. The company currently has a market value of $2.7 billion. But a sales process could help push the stock much higher, Ancora forecast, saying the price could rise to at least $76 a share. "A sale is the best path to realizing Ashland's intrinsic value in the face of the company's significant trading discount and near-term growth and execution issues," the presentation said. "Ashland is an attractive asset to a deep pool of strategics and financial sponsors alike." Standard Investments, the investment platform of privately held global industrial conglomerate Standard Industries, currently ranks as Ashland's biggest investor, with a stake of nearly 10%. Industry analysts have speculated it might be among a group of potential buyers, especially since it has experience with these kinds of takeovers after it bought chemical giant W.R. Grace in 2021. By publicly calling on Ashland to sell, Ancora said it could act as a catalyst and give "the full field of buyers cover to come forward" while also giving management and the board a forceful nudge to move ahead. Ancora, which cemented its reputation as a successful investor with more than two dozen campaigns in the last six years at companies including railroad Norfolk Southern (NSC.N) and retailer Kohls (KSS.N), is unveiling its Ashland campaign at the Wolfe Research Activist Conference on Tuesday. As the pace of mergers and acquisitions has picked up this year, a number of investors have become more vocal in pushing management to sell certain businesses or even the entire company, heaping new pressure on boards and management teams. While praising Ashland's key products and loyal list of customers, Ancora also signaled it is ready to turn up the heat. "If constructive dialogue with the board and management does not lead to a near-term resolution, then the company’s upcoming nominating window provides an opportunity to add fresh leadership to the board and ensure proper fiduciary oversight is exercised," the presentation said. Ancora has a list of potential director nominees who know the company well and would be ready to run for seats in a proxy fight. Ancora has attributed some of the company's lackluster performance to Ashland CEO Guillermo Novo, who was appointed to the top job in 2019 with a mandate to transform the company into a pure-play specialty chemicals company by selling noncore businesses and cutting costs. Despite some improvements, Ancora notes that the stock price has dropped 24% during Novo's tenure. The hedge fund stopped short of calling for Novo's ouster but left little doubt that time has run out for management to deliver and that it wants to see stronger actions now, the presentation shows.

Read the article

6/9/2026

Jana Urges Fiserv to Sell More Assets, Refresh Board

Reuters (06/09/26) Herbst-Bayliss, Svea

Jana Partners wants payments company Fiserv (FISV.O) to sell additional assets and appoint new directors with banking software and payments experience, the investor said on Tuesday. After months of private discussions with the company, Jana is now for the first time sharing its plans for the company. Speaking at Wolfe Research's annual Activist Conference, Jana's managing partner Scott Ostfeld said he believes Fiserv should aggressively pursue non-core divestitures. "Fiserv is in the early innings of rehabilitating its credibility with customers and investors," Ostfeld said. "We believe further portfolio reshaping and expanding the board's refreshment process to add relevant experience would speed the credibility rebuilding process and lead to a re-rating of the stock." Fiserv's stock price has tumbled nearly 70% in the last 12 months and Tuesday marks the first time Ostfeld has discussed the investment publicly since buying in late last year. The New York-based hedge fund, one of the industry's most successful investors, first invested in the Milwaukee-headquartered company in late 2025 following a 60% drop in Fiserv's share price. The company, which provides fintech services to banks, credit unions and merchants, has seen its stock price drop nearly 20% in 2026 and it closed trading at $52.72 on Monday. During the first quarter, Jana nearly doubled its investment in Fiserv to own just under 1%, making the hedge fund one of the company's top 20 investors. Fiserv has a market valuation of $28 billion. Ostfeld stopped short of calling for a broader breakup of the company, but noted this might be an attractive option in the future if the company's valuation does not improve. Jana supports Chief Executive Mike Lyons, who was appointed to the top job in May 2025, and his efforts to rebuild the company's credibility. The firm also believes Fiserv is in a unique position to help banks and credit unions adopt artificial intelligence tools in their own businesses, including through a recently announced collaboration with OpenAI. Last month, Fiserv said it partnered with Bridgeport Partners to form a joint venture spinning off its ATM managed services, cash logistics and MoneyPass networks. It also sold its Education Solutions student loan servicing business to Infinite Computer Solutions. Jana has experience in the financial services sector and in 2023 successfully pushed Fiserv competitor Fidelity National Information Services (FIS) to separate its Worldpay payments business. Currently the hedge fund is pushing for a big share buyback and breakup at holding company Markel Group (MKL.N) and a sale of digital banking platform Alkami Technology (ALKT.O). Activist investors have increasingly called for companies to sell some of their businesses or the entire company in the last months, industry analysts have said, at a time the pace of mergers and acquisitions is picking up and bankers are preparing for more activity in the second half of the year.

Read the article

6/8/2026

Independent Proxy Advisory Firms ISS and Glass Lewis Unanimously Support the Election of ALL Director Nominees at Dynacor’s AGM

GlobeNewswire (06/08/26)

Dynacor Group Inc. (TSX: DNG) announced that its director nominees and other annual meeting resolutions received favorable voting recommendations from Glass Lewis and Co., LLC and Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (ISS). ISS and Glass Lewis have recommended that Dynacor's shareholders vote FOR the election of each of the Corporation’s director nominees at the Corporation’s Annual General Meeting of Shareholders, which will be held on June 19. Additionally, ISS and Glass Lewis recommend that shareholders vote FOR the re-appointment of the auditor. Glass Lewis has also recommended voting FOR the amendment to the Stock Option Plan to replenish the pool. ISS, which supported the same plan in connection with last year's AGM, has noted a minor clarification regarding amendment provisions consistent with its recent guidance, which the Board will consider the next time the plan is amended. The plan, meanwhile, fully complies with regulatory and TSX requirements. Dynacor is disappointed that iolite Partners Ltd. has circulated a dissident proxy circular soliciting shareholders to withhold votes from certain director nominees, among other disruptive actions. Dynacor reminds shareholders that the dissident was not elected at last year’s special meeting, which he called in an attempt to secure his election to Dynacor’s board. The Dissident’s recommendations would not serve the best interests of shareholders and would undermine the Corporation's strategic momentum and governance stability The Dissident’s campaign continues a pattern of disruptive activism that diverts disproportionate corporate resources toward responding to repetitive requests and unfounded allegations that do not advance the Corporation's interests. Despite unsuccessful efforts in 2025, including a failed requisitioned meeting, a failed withhold campaign, and a failed attempt to elect a director to Dynacor’s board, the Dissident persists in challenging shareholder decisions. Notably, following the failed 2025 campaigns, the Dissident made unreasonable demands regarding share buybacks and legal fees, that overturn other shareholder decisions and disregard their interests. The current solicitation, characterized by misleading communications, appears once again driven by the Dissident's personal objectives rather than shareholder value.

Read the article

6/7/2026

Japanese Firms Field Record Proposals From Activists at This Year's Shareholder Meetings

Reuters (06/07/26) Bridge, Anton

Activist investors have made a record number of proposals to Japanese firms for shareholders to vote on at annual general meetings this month, including growing calls for company executives to step down. Fueling the boom has been multi-year prodding of Japanese companies by regulators and the Tokyo Stock Exchange to improve shareholder returns and invest in growth, as well as some recent big activist wins. As of June 3, 139 proposals by activist shareholders were submitted for votes at AGMs, two more than last year, according to data compiled by Mitsubishi UFJ Trust Bank. The majority were submitted by foreign investors. Of these, 19 either oppose a company-nominated director's appointment or nominate a new director candidate. That's up from 14 such proposals last year and just seven in 2024. It's not easy for shareholder proposals to pass in any region, though they often pressure companies to reform. In Japan, fewer than one in 20 submitted since January 2023 have passed, data compiled by shareholder advisory firm SquareWell Partners shows. That said, activist ambitions have grown after a vote instigated by Oasis Management last year ousted the CEO of chemicals firm Taiyo Holdings (4626.T) - a rarely accomplished feat. High-profile campaigns by other activists, even if conducted by other means, have also provided an important boost. Of particular note was U.S.-based Elliott Investment Management's milestone victory over Toyota (7203.T) against the terms of a buyout of a group firm - a campaign it waged through vocal public opposition. Of the many proposals put forward by activist investors, a June 25 shareholder vote at Kyoto-based electronics manufacturer Kyocera (6971.T) is expected to be among those garnering attention. Oasis, which has previously argued that Kyocera should divest unprofitable businesses and accelerate restructuring, is now calling for Chairman Goro Yamaguchi to step down. "Taiyo was the same situation (as Kyocera) where the CEO was allocating capital toward and heralding a poor business that was taking away from the good margins of the great business," said Seth Fischer, chief investment officer at Oasis. Yamaguchi, who has led Kyocera since 2017, gained 63.8% of shareholder votes last year - very low for a Japanese business leader and a far cry from the 79% he had in 2021. Kyocera's board has rejected Oasis' proposals, highlighting Yamaguchi's contributions to governance and management reforms. Oasis is also calling for shareholders to vote against the heads of publisher and gaming company Kadokawa (9468.T), Tokyo Steel (5423.T), and recruitment firm SMS (2175.T). Kadokawa and SMS' boards rejected Oasis' proposals, while Tokyo Steel has yet to publicly respond. "Right now, one effective way that we can galvanize other investors and improve the companies is to hold management accountable for poor performance if they don't deserve to be voted back in," Fischer said. Other funds vocal this year include entities affiliated with Dalton Investments. They have in several cases proposed the appointment of independent directors with capital markets experience that they argue is lacking on the firms' boards, such as at probiotic drink maker Yakult (2267.T). UK-based AVI has called for the president of tablet manufacturer Wacom (6727.T) to step down, citing governance concerns and declining profits. Yakult's board has rejected the Dalton proposal. Wacom's board has also rejected the proposed dismissal of its president but it has suspended its relationship with another company set up by the president after AVI's campaigning. Domestic asset managers are also now taking a harder line on firms' capital allocation decisions and profit performances, lifting chances that they will vote against company leaders. In particular, they tend to vote against management when there has been low return on equity or there are excessive cross shareholdings, the MUFJ Trust Bank data showed. "Domestic managers feel more comfortable voting against a director's reelection if they feel something's wrong," said Ali Saribas, partner at SquareWell Partners.

Read the article

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

1/16/2027

Dealmakers See More Retail Mergers and IPOs in 2026 After Tariffs Sidelined M&A Last Year

Reuters (01/16/27) Summerville, Abigail

Dealmakers predict an uptick in mergers and IPOs for retailers and consumer goods companies this year after punishing tariffs on imports to the United States had sidelined activity in the industry for the first half of 2025. Several national restaurant and convenience store chains are primed for IPOs, along with organic baby food company Once Upon a Farm, Hellman & Friedman-backed auto repair company Caliber Holdings, and Bob’s Discount Furniture, which is owned by Bain Capital, according to more than two dozen CEOs, M&A advisors and private equity investors who attended the ICR Conference in Orlando, Florida this week. “The number of high-quality companies that are in queue to go public in 2026 is higher than we’ve seen since 2021,” Ben Frost, Goldman Sachs' (GS) global co-head of the consumer retail group said in an interview. “The question is does that mean more will go public? If it does, private investors will see the ability to exit investments again (in a) regular way, which will help (private equity) activity.” Frost was one of the more than 3,000 attendees at the annual gathering, where executives from Walmart (WMT.O), Shake Shack (SHAK.N), and Jersey Mike’s were among presenters while bankers, lawyers and private equity investors spent much of their time brokering deals and landing clients behind the scenes. The upbeat mood was a marked shift from last spring after U.S. President Donald Trump's "Liberation Day" tariff announcements sent markets skidding and killed or stalled several consumer and retail deals. The second half of the year saw a resurgence in activity that brought with it several mega deals, including Kimberly-Clark’s (KMB.O) nearly $50 billion deal to buy Kenvue (KVUE.N), announced in November. "(Companies) are still really focused on growth and synergies. They’re looking at bigger deals than they’ve been willing to do for the last number of years. The back half of last year was the start of that,” Frost said. Kraft Heinz (KHC.O) announced in September it would split into two companies to unwind its 2015 merger, shortly after Keurig Dr Pepper (KDP.O) had agreed to buy JDE Peet’s for $18 billion with plans to split the coffee and non-coffee beverages into separate companies. In apparel, Gildan Activewear (GIL) bought Hanesbrands for $2.2 billion. Investors could also spur more deals and corporate breakups in the sectors, Audra Cohen, co-head of the consumer and retail group at law firm Sullivan & Cromwell, said in an interview at the conference. Corporate agitators have taken recent stakes in Lululemon Athletica (LULU.O) and Target (TGT.N), but aren't yet pushing for M&A. Lululemon hosted a morning yoga class and its management team met with analysts and investors at the conference. Meanwhile, private equity buyers are beating out companies for some deals, Manna Tree Partners co-founder Ellie Rubenstein told Reuters. Her firm sold its cottage cheese brand Good Culture to a larger consumer-focused firm L Catterton just last week. “A lot of these brands have gotten lost (inside big corporations) and the consumers don’t like it. You may see a lot of corporate carveouts this year,” Rubenstein told Reuters in an interview after her keynote address. She interviewed her billionaire father and Carlyle co-founder David Rubenstein, 76, on stage at the conference. The father-daughter pair contrasted their portfolios, pointing to Carlyle’s history of investing in fast food chains like McDonald's (MCD.N) and KFC Korea while Manna Tree saw big returns from investments in healthier food brands like pasture-raised egg producer Vital Farms (VITL.O) and Good Culture.

Read the article

6/17/2026

Foreign Activists Take Aim at Bigger Targets in Corporate Japan

Nikkei Asia (06/17/26) Obe, Mitsuru

As corporate Japan's annual general meeting season reaches its peak in the coming week, activist investors are descending on their second-largest market after the United States with bigger companies in their sights. There is a sense of anticipation, with activist pressure widely credited with instilling discipline in Japan's boardrooms and helping catalyze a market rally that has lifted the Nikkei Stock Average 38% this year and doubled it over the past three years. "Engagement by shareholders, including activists, in discussions with companies and proposing ideas is in itself positive and helps improve corporate value," said Hiroyuki Sameshima, a director responsible for corporate governance at the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. But within the business community, there is palpable unease over the rise of activist investors, with some viewed as corporate raiders seeking quick gains by stripping companies of unused assets. Activists are aware of the tension. As fund managers, they are judged on returns, but their success increasingly depends on public acceptance as they take on larger targets. "The nature of activism has changed in recent years toward aiming to leave companies in better condition than they found them, rather than simply demanding big one-off buybacks, which was always likely to get their people's backs up," said Nicholas Smith, Japan strategist at CLSA, a Hong Kong-based brokerage house. Last year, Elliott Investment Management made headlines by taking on Toyota Industries -- the de facto holding company of Toyota Motor Group (TYO: 7203) companies -- after revelations of years of engine data falsification at the world's largest forklift truck maker. The campaign nearly derailed plans to take the company private and reorganize the group around it, before the two sides reached a compromise on the buyout price. "An activist challenging a company as large as Toyota is something that will likely be remembered in Japan's corporate history," said Hidetaka Kawakita, a professor emeritus at Kyoto University and a corporate governance expert. "It was remarkable that the activist pushed Toyota to concede that shareholders' interests should carry as much weight as those of the founding family." A person familiar with the matter said Elliott still sees a significant number of undervalued companies in Japan, despite strong market performance over the past three years, and that the New York-based investor is likely to deploy more capital, driving further activity in the coming months and years. Its growing focus on larger-cap names also reflects an influx of smaller players into the market, the person added. "The story of corporate governance has barely begun in Japan," said CLSA's Smith, citing slow improvement in Japan Inc.'s return on equity, almost entirely due to rising profit margins without having addressed vast cash, equity and real estate holdings on balance sheets. The shift in Japan mirrors developments in the United States and elsewhere, where activism has moved beyond capital allocation to deeper structural interventions, such as board overhauls and breakups, including Elliott's call to split up BP, over the past decade. "What happened in the United States will happen in Japan, though with a lag in shareholder activism," said Atsuko Furuta, president of Deloitte Tohmatsu Equity Advisory. "The pace of catch-up is accelerating, however." U.S.-style public campaigns are also beginning to take hold in Japan. Singapore-based 3D Investment, led by former Goldman Sachs (NASDAQ: GS) banker Kanya Hasegawa, launched a manga-driven campaign this month against a "poison pill" planned by its target, the medical wholesaler Toho (TYO: 9602). The tactic echoed Disney's (NYSE: DIS) use of its cartoon character Pinocchio on social media to rally retail investors behind its board slate in 2024, rather than the nominees put forward by investor Trian. "It's very hard to label activism as good or bad," said Eric Liu, portfolio manager at Harris Associates, a Chicago-based investment manager. While many activist proposals make sense, aggressive and antagonistic tactics can be counterproductive, he argued. He also warned against placing too much emphasis on short-term returns at the expense of businesses with longer-term potential. "Overall, the presence of activist investors in Japan is positive," he said. They provided a market mechanism that forced management teams to scrutinize their performance and balance sheet efficiency. "I think there's more good than bad in the mechanism they provide." Activism is a form of value investing, aimed at unlocking the true worth of assets through interventions such as divestitures, capital allocation changes and governance reforms. It can also help balance out riskier investment strategies. "AI is a powerful technology, but the key question is price," Liu said. "If the future doesn't play out as expected, valuations will come down. We seek to protect our clients' capital by investing in areas with low valuations and downside protection." In the latest round of AGMs, 133 shareholder proposals compares with 141 last year, according to Daiwa Institute of Research. "Shareholder proposals have already reached a significant level. Rather than increasing further in number, the focus is likely to shift to their content," pointed out Hajime Nakajima, managing director at Deloitte Tohmatsu Equity Advisory, predicting a move towards ones that addressed core management issues rather than quick, easily implemented measures such as dividend increases. The number of activist campaigns continues to rise, reaching 72 between January and May, up from 70 in the comparable period last year, according to Deloitte Tohmatsu. For activists, filing a shareholder proposal and fighting for proxy votes are often the last resort. Instead, there is a strong preference to work collaboratively and behind the scenes with management teams, people familiar with the matter said. Oasis Management, another prominent investor, has mounted high-profile campaigns against household products maker Kao (TYO: 4452) and electric motors giant Nidec (TYO: 6594). For Thursday's AGM at Nidec, Oasis has no proposals. At Kao, it is calling for more independent directors with international expertise to boost overseas sales. At Nidec, it is pushing for governance reform, including appointing truly independent directors and reducing reliance on any single individual. For many, the annual meeting is a gauge of shareholder sentiment towards management and the board. Executives and directors in Japan are highly sensitive to voting support, with anything below 90% widely seen as a warning sign, giving activists ammunition to press their case in post-meeting negotiations. In June last year, support for Sumitomo Realty's (TYO: 8830) chairman and its CEO was only in the 70% range. By the end of the year, the company had announced a share buyback and a plan to reduce cross-shareholdings to less than 10% of equity capital, as well as saying it would establish a nomination committee as part of a broader governance reform effort. Japan introduced its first corporate governance code in 2015, but reforms gained real traction in 2022 after the Tokyo Stock Exchange added teeth to the rules, tying listing and Topix inclusion to numerical targets such as market capitalization. In April, the Financial Services Agency and the Tokyo Stock Exchange released a draft revision to the governance code, the first in five years. The code's proposed update sets out key governance principles such as a majority-independent board, board member qualifications and cross-shareholding reduction. While not mandatory, it has given activists a basis for demanding dialogue with management and holding companies' feet to the fire. Investors such as Elliott are seen as strong backers of regulatory reforms to improve capital market quality, viewing them as critical to their own campaigns. The revised code refers to the "effective use of cash" on balance sheets in an explanatory note and calls for its productive use, but stops short of making it a bold-lettered principle. CLSA's Smith argued the government needed to add more bite to the code to make it effective. "It's all soft law. There is nothing in the changes to the governance code that really has the teeth of hard law and says, 'Put that money to work,'" he said. He suggested making businesses ineligible for tax breaks if they had net cash of more than 20% of equity. "It's very important that corporate Japan not take its foot off the gas pedal," added Harris Associates' Liu. "Otherwise, capital, which is competitive, will find another home."

Read the article

6/16/2026

CarMax Earnings on Deck: New CEO Faces Profitability Test

Investing.com (06/16/26)

CarMax Inc. (NYSE: KMX) reports first-quarter results Wednesday morning before the market opens, marking the first earnings test for new President and CEO Keith Barr, who was appointed in March. The report comes as the nation’s largest used-car retailer navigates a challenging market and intensifying pressure from Starboard Value LP, which disclosed a sizable stake earlier this year. Analysts expect earnings per share of $0.96 on revenue of $7.39 billion for the quarter ended May 31, representing a sharp 31% decline in earnings and a 2% revenue decrease from the year-ago period. The forecast marks a significant sequential improvement from the prior quarter, when CarMax reported EPS of $0.34 on revenue of $5.95 billion—results that handily beat expectations by 89%. The stock carries a neutral consensus rating from 20 analysts, with a mean price target of $42.69 implying 18% downside from the current price of $52.21. Recent activity has been cautious: Barclays (NYSE: BCS) raised its price target to $31 from $26 while maintaining a sell rating, and JPMorgan (NYSE: JPM) also holds a sell rating with a $37 target. UBS (NYSE: UBS) initiated coverage in late May with a neutral rating and $42 price target. EPS estimates have edged up nearly 2% over the past 60 days, while revenue estimates have remained largely flat, suggesting analysts see limited upside to current expectations. The stock has traded in a wide range over the past year, from a low of $30.26 to a high of $71.99, and currently sits closer to the middle of that band. The report will provide the first glimpse into Barr’s strategic priorities and whether he can reverse declining profitability trends. Barclays noted CarMax has "an uneven track record of performance" and that "meaningful changes" could come in fiscal 2027 under new leadership. A key tension involves the tradeoff between sales growth and profitability. UBS analysts suggested CarMax may need to lower its target gross profit per unit to reaccelerate sales, which could pressure margins. That dynamic matters in a market where used-car prices spiked 3.1% month-over-month in May, with the average vehicle climbing more than $870, potentially affecting both inventory costs and consumer affordability. Investors will also scrutinize whether CarMax can gain market share in what analysts project will be a roughly flat year for used-car sales. Industry forecasts call for the market to decline about 1% year-over-year in 2026, with inventory remaining tight and demand consistent as consumers seek lower-cost options.

Read the article

6/10/2026

What Next for BP? Leadership Exits Test Investor Confidence in Board Oversight

CNBC (06/10/26) Meredith, Sam

BP (LON: BP) is on its third CEO and third chairman in under three years, prompting investor scrutiny of the structure and oversight of its board as the oil major works to turn itself around and adapt to the supply shock. Weeks after CEO Meg O’Neill started in April, the chairman, Albert Manifold, was suddenly dismissed in late May. The board said this was due to “serious concerns” relating to governance standards, oversight and conduct. Manifold said he had been fired “without warning and without explanation,” adding he disputes “entirely the characterization” of his conduct. One of the oil supermajor’s top active investors told CNBC that some may be in danger of missing the bigger picture, while a shareholder said the company urgently needed to address the reasons for the turnover. Nick Mazan, oil and gas strategy lead at shareholder ACCR, said BP had to provide “a clear and honest reflection” about the selection process that led to Manifold’s appointment. “The nomination process appears to be dysfunctional. No large cap company should have had three CEOs and chairs in as many years,” Mazan told CNBC by email. “There are understandably major questions about whether the board, as presently constituted, having presided over a chaotic period of leadership turnover, is up to the task of identifying a new chair and challenging the CEO on the current strategy of increased upstream spending,” he continued. “It’s difficult to see how the company can rebuild trust and confidence with investors. A more active role from shareholders in the board nominations process may be required.” When asked for comment, BP referred CNBC to comments by Ian Tyler, the firm’s interim chair, who said on the day of Manifold’s dismissal: “The Board and leadership team have deep conviction in the strategic direction we have laid out, and the company is moving at pace to deliver it.” O’Neill is seeking to simplify the company’s structure by returning to an upstream and downstream model, part of a pivot away from renewables and back to its core business of oil and gas. The company said Tuesday that Gordon Birrell will lead its upstream unit, which focuses on oil and gas, and Richard Harding will be interim head of the downstream unit, which includes refining, terminals, biofuels, and aviation. Brian Kersmanc, portfolio manager at GQG Partners, one of BP’s largest investors, said investors were “missing the forest for the trees” over the personnel departures. “I think the overall strategic direction of BP and the progress they’ve already made is more impactful than personnel shake-ups,” Kersmanc told CNBC by email. The Iran war has triggered the largest oil supply disruption in history, putting severe pressure on global energy markets. Kersmanc said the current “supply constrained energy market,” had left the industry without an “easy fix” to restore supply levels nor “is there the desire or ability” for oil companies to increase supply. Kersmanc added that BP boasts “extremely strong and diverse assets,” while the market appears to be valuing the company more like a mid-cap shale producer than a global integrated oil major. “We think the rate of free cash flow they will be able to produce will increase, especially if we see higher energy prices for longer,” he added. Maurizio Carulli, global energy analyst at wealth manager Quilter Cheviot, said Manifold’s removal and Lin’s exit were unrelated, and the impact was likely to be limited. “While the news may be viewed negatively in the short term, it is important to remember that BP has refocused its strategy and made significant operational improvements over the past year,” Carulli said. “These changes reflect the efforts of the wider organization and its management team, rather than being reliant on any single individual.” John Browne, who was BP CEO for 13 years until 2007, told CNBC’s “Executive Decisions” that not all of the problems facing the oil major are systemic. He said “a lot of things” had changed over the last 20 years, “not least shareholders’ determination that the oil and gas industry should go back to its roots and spend more of its capital.” BP needs to “stabilize for the future,” Browne said in the wide-ranging interview with Steve Sedgwick. "It’s so clear to me that, unless the leadership is A grade, not B grade, not A minus, A, or A plus grade, and it’s stable. You will not make good returns,” Browne said. When asked whether BP’s new CEO is an A-grade leader, Browne said it’s “too early to tell.” “I know Megan very well, and I helped her for a period of time when she was at Woodside (NYSE: WDS), and I wish her all good fortune. But in the end, you can never [know]. She has great promise, but you can never talk about anybody until it’s all over,” he said. When asked what the personnel changes mean for investors, Quilter Cheviot’s Carulli said multiple layers of management at such large organizations mean that “the departure of a single individual, however senior, should not materially affect the overall business.” “It is important that BP’s board runs a thorough and well-considered process to appoint a new chair, including reflecting on any lessons from the circumstances surrounding Albert Manifold’s departure,” he added.

Read the article

6/10/2026

How Cracker Barrel’s CEO Saved Her Job by Abandoning Her Own Strategy

Wall Street Journal (06/10/26) Haddon, Heather

Last summer, Chief Executive Julie Felss Masino was trolled mercilessly as she pressed forward with a Cracker Barrel (NASDAQ: CBRL) revamp, from remaking the folksy logo atop restaurants to pulling antique tchotchkes off the walls. Amid the criticism, she was subjected to remarks about her eyeglasses and comments about her “woke” attitude. She fielded unsolicited business advice from President Trump over the logo redesign and company management. And investor Sardar Biglari vowed to remove her through a proxy battle. But on Tuesday she delivered a new outlook so rosy that shares shot up as much as 35%. Masino survived by unceremoniously casting aside her original plans in the wake of a customer and social-media revolt and focusing back on the brand’s core customers, a maneuver many CEOs struggle to pull off. “What I’ve always admired about Julie is her grit and determination, I think people underestimate her,” said Greg Creed, former Yum Brands (NYSE: YUM) CEO, who led the fast-food company’s Taco Bell business while Masino worked as an executive there. Masino told investors Tuesday that her new strategy to bring the family-dining chain back from huge losses in sales, profit and the number of guests coming through its doors is working. Loyal customers have come back as the company refocused on dishing up its most die-hard fans’ favorite foods, deals and nostalgia. “The food is even more delicious, is made the way that they remember and the service is going to be out of this world,” Masino said. One particular bright spot: merchandise commemorating the 250th birthday of America and other heritage items that flew off Cracker Barrel store shelves faster than expected, including U.S. Constitution T-shirts, flag pillows and patriotic smock dresses. The return of nostalgic favorites, like campfire meals and ham dinners, are helping to woo back guests, too, the company said. In addition to improved earnings for the past quarter, Cracker Barrel also boosted its expectations for sales and profit for the rest of the fiscal year. The stock zoomed, closing up more than 22%, at its highest price since September, when political attacks on the brand continued to rage. But Cracker Barrel isn’t out of the woods yet. Restaurant customer traffic declined 6.7% from a year earlier in the three months through May 1, an improvement from the previous quarter but still a loss that executives are trying to reverse. Cracker Barrel’s market capitalization is down around $550 million from last year’s highs. While Masino made TV appearances and spoke at conferences before the controversy, she has been less visible this year, focusing on internal improvements and rejiggering plans. Her tone has also changed, from renovate to preserve. “We have been really clear. We put the remodel program on pause this year, given everything that happened to us,” Masino said during the call with investors. Instead of the Cracker Barrel pop-up it staged in Manhattan last year, the company is focused on promoting its brand at Speedway Motorsports races this summer. It is updating paint and bathrooms in Cracker Barrel restaurants but has no immediate plans to resume the extensive store remodeling that sparked so much outcry. Many CEOs struggle to survive a controversy of Cracker Barrel’s size. Board members can get impatient, leading to a CEO’s ouster. In 2024, for example, Starbucks (NASDAQ: SBUX) removed its handpicked CEO, who was contending with a unionization drive among baristas along with a social-media uproar over the brand after some workers’ and management’s comments about the Israel-Gaza conflict. When corporate boards are assessing current and future CEOs, increasingly they are looking for executives who can be agile in difficult situations, both internally and externally, said Seema Threja, global head of executive recruitment firm Spencer Stuart’s hospitality and leisure practice. “Leaders are no longer being judged in a vacuum,” Threja said. “It’s around learning agility. Can a person take a hard signal and adjust?” Recruited to Cracker Barrel in 2023, Masino set a multiyear brand update in motion. The goal was to modernize its stores, menu and design to help bring new customers to the vintage chain. The company had seen some promising results from food updates and marketing tie-ins when, as part of a fall marketing campaign in 2025, it unveiled a new, simplified logo. But when launched more widely, the redesign plunged Cracker Barrel into a culture war-fueled battle, with critics accusing it of shunning its heritage—and loyal diners. Some of the online pushback was ginned up by bots. “Cracker Barrel should go back to the old logo, admit a mistake based on customer response (the ultimate Poll), and manage the company better than ever before,” Trump wrote on social media in August as the backlash reached a boiling point. Cracker Barrel in late August said it would return to its previous logo featuring its “Old Timer” icon and barrel. In early September, it suspended its restaurant redesign test. Still, the company’s shares slid by more than a third by the fall from its late-July high. Masino took action. She cut ties with the marketing firm behind the chain’s rebranding campaign and revamped the company’s leadership structure, bringing back a former vice president for menu strategy and elevating a veteran field operator to oversee store operations. In the company’s kitchens, workers returned to traditional kettle cooking for sides like green beans and stopped freezing biscuits in batches. Cracker Barrel asked customers to give feedback and promised to keep refining its offerings in response. Even so, the activist investor who has mounted repeated proxy fights at Cracker Barrel, Biglari, set in motion a new one to remove Masino and another board member, Gilbert Dávila. Cracker Barrel shareholders voted around 75% of shares in favor of keeping Masino, less support than the prior year but enough to regain her position. Dávila, a marketing specialist and board member since 2020, didn’t receive the necessary votes to stay on the board and resigned. The company has trimmed its costs, laid off corporate staff and pulled back on big marketing spending. At the store level, some workers said the company has pushed them to sell more popular retail items like squeezy children’s toys, along with drinks and take-home meals. They have also stressed greeting guests quickly, even during busy hours. While weekends are busy, weekdays can still be slow. Restaurant visits have gradually improved this spring but remain down by 5.7% in May from a year earlier, according to Placer.ai, which analyzes foot traffic. Restaurant teams and executives are focused and hustling, Masino said, but Cracker Barrel’s recovery remains fragile. The company warned that its sales could be affected by rising gasoline prices and lower-income consumers further tightening their belts and eating out less. “It’s just some real hard work,” she said.

Read the article

6/9/2026

Commentary: Northern Star Demerger Idea Gains Currency After Elliott Activism, as CEO Search Continues

The Australian (06/09/26) Carter, Bridget

The board of Northern Star Resources (ASX: NST) is discovering that Elliott Investment Management’s agitation for a sale has added the complication of making the chief executive search considerably harder. Elliott, which holds about 4% of Northern Star, has been pushing for a strategic review to address what it regards as underperformance. The board has engaged an international search firm to replace outgoing chief executive Stuart Tonkin, who steps down in the first quarter of the 2027 financial year. But sources close to the process say the Elliott factor is now hanging over candidate conversations in a practical way. Any credible external candidate — and the board’s preferred profile remains a senior executive from a major gold house such as Newmont (NYSE: NEM) or Gold Fields (NYSE: GFI) — will want to know what happens to them if Elliott gets its way and the company is sold shortly after they take the chair. The expectation is that Northern Star will need to offer any successful candidate a change-of-control provision — effectively a guaranteed payout in the event of a takeover — to make the role attractive. Without it, the pool of willing and qualified candidates narrows considerably. It is an irony that Elliott’s activism may end up adding to the cost of the very leadership transition the company needs. On a full sale, Macquarie analysts — who recently published a note evaluating three strategic scenarios — broadly align with Elliott’s own valuation analysis. The bank’s view is that the realistic buyer universe is limited to a handful of large multinationals, including Barrick (NYSE: B), Newmont, Agnico Eagle (NYSE: AEM), AngloGold Ashanti (NYSE: AU), and Gold Fields. It flags that a return by Barrick or Newmont to the Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines operation — which both companies sold in 2019 — would represent a significant reversal of strategy. Separately, at least one well-regarded investor has been canvassing a more structural idea, and that is a demerger of the smaller, non-core assets accumulated through Northern Star’s merger and acquisition activity. This largely relates to the $16 billion merger with Saracen Mineral Holdings in 2020. The assets in question include Carosue Dam, Jundee, and the Kalgoorlie operations including Kanowna Bell and South Kalgoorlie. They are not bad assets. They are simply not the same caliber as the crown jewels, and the argument is that the market is not adequately valuing either pool while they sit under the same roof. Macquarie lends some analytical weight to this, describing a “carve-up” scenario in which non-core assets across the Kalgoorlie and Yandal hubs are divested, potentially yielding proceeds in line with consensus net asset value and comparable transactions. The bank also canvasses a “self-help” path — an operational turnaround centered on the KCGM expansion ramp-up, leveraging Pogo, and disciplined execution of Hemi — noting explicitly that an operationally focused chief executive would be central to that strategy, which sharpens the stakes around the current recruitment process considerably. Under the demerger scenario doing the rounds in investor circles, the non-core operations would be spun out as a separate listed vehicle — a well-capitalized mid-tier producer potentially comparable to a company like Genesis Minerals — leaving the rump Northern Star as a tighter, higher-quality business built around its best assets. The appeal is that it addresses the Elliott problem without capitulating to it. The move creates a cleaner Northern Star that is a more compelling acquisition target if a sale eventually proceeds, and a more defensible standalone business if it does not. Whether the board has appetite for that level of structural disruption — on top of a chief executive transition, an activist campaign, and ongoing operational complexity at Kalgoorlie — is another question. But the idea is getting a hearing among people who know the company well, and the fact that a major institutional broker has now mapped out a version of it in research puts it a step closer to the mainstream.

Read the article

6/9/2026

Commentary: Activist Pressure Starts With Underperformance

CFO.com (06/09/26) Orsini, Ron

Ron Orsini, managing director at Alvarez & Marsal, says, "Activist investors are pushing more companies toward breakups and forced sales at a pace not seen in years, but the trigger is consistent: Sustained operational underperformance relative to peers. Global activism campaigns reached record levels in 2025, and demands for sales or breakups appeared in roughly one-third of those situations. Companies that want to avoid this growing pressure need to examine their own performance through the same analytical lens activists use and address operational gaps before outside investors do it for them. The surge in activism reflects a simple pattern: Investors focus on companies whose financial performance lags behind peers. When businesses struggle to generate competitive growth and margins, activists begin asking whether the existing structure is suppressing value. Recent airline campaigns illustrate the point, with persistent investor scrutiny after sustained margin underperformance. In many instances, mergers and acquisitions become the blunt instrument used to address those concerns. A breakup or sale can create an immediate premium for shareholders and a clear outcome that markets understand. Activists know how powerful that narrative can be. Once it gains traction among investors, boards struggle to pivot the conversation back to operational improvement — particularly without a credible, time-bound plan to close performance gaps. The environment has made these dynamics more powerful. Regulatory shifts have opened the door to more M&A activity, and rising foreign investment has expanded the pool of potential buyers. When there are more paths to a transaction, activists gain leverage. A record number of campaigns in 2025 led to more CEO departures, more board seats won, and a growing share of deals ending in a sale or breakup. The best defense begins well before an activist appears by identifying and closing performance gaps before investors do. Leadership teams should regularly evaluate their businesses using the same methods activists employ. A disciplined outside-in analysis allows management to identify vulnerabilities early and close the performance gaps that attract activist attention. Three areas are critical: 1. External benchmarking: Activists typically begin by reviewing growth rates, operating margins, return on invested capital, inventory turns and working-capital efficiency relative to comparable companies. These metrics offer a quick signal of whether a business is delivering competitive results. 2. Internal benchmarking: Many diversified companies contain divisions that perform exceptionally well alongside others that struggle. The strongest business units often demonstrate practices that can be replicated elsewhere. Examining how those internal leaders manage pricing, supply chains, customer relationships and support costs can reveal opportunities for improvement. 3. Operational practices vs. best-in-class operators: Companies that lag in automation, digital capabilities or process discipline often carry unnecessary cost and complexity. Improvements in pricing, customer segmentation, supply chain coordination and working capital management can unlock significant value without major structural changes. For many companies, these levers add up to more value than a one-time transaction premium. This “outside in” analysis forms the foundation for a credible value-creation plan. Investors want clear evidence that leadership understands where performance gaps exist and has a roadmap for closing them. That roadmap should focus on measurable operational improvements rather than abstract strategic aspirations. Recently, an established media and entertainment company expanded aggressively into new platforms. As losses continued and capital requirements increased, investors demanded clearer accountability, milestones, and reinvestment discipline. Management recalibrated the growth strategy to focus on margin improvement, capital efficiency, and measurable business economics — shifting investor scrutiny toward profitability and returns as activists focused on new platform losses, cost structure and capital allocation. A company’s board plays a critical role in ensuring discipline. Management teams often present ambitious transformation strategies that promise meaningful results several years into the future. Investors place greater weight on early indicators of progress. Operational improvement plans should include milestones that demonstrate near-term traction, supported by the same financial and operational metrics investors watch — growth, profitability, returns on invested capital and working-capital efficiency. Boards should embed rigorous performance reviews into the strategic planning cycle rather than treating them as a defensive exercise triggered by activist pressure. Addressing potential weaknesses before outside investors raise them preserves strategic flexibility and strengthens credibility with shareholders. This sort of disciplined, operational plan offers a more durable path than the strategic review companies so often launch to explore possible transactions. While these announcements are intended to signal responsiveness, most strategic reviews fail to produce transactions; two-thirds of companies that announce a public review receive no viable offer within a year, and the resulting uncertainty around outcomes and timing often puts pressure on share prices. The process can also reshape the shareholder base, pushing out long-term investors and drawing in short-term arbitrage traders. Instead, a plan that demonstrates a clear understanding of the company’s challenges and presents a credible plan for improving performance reinforces confidence by demonstrating progress against defined milestones. Activists play an important role in corporate governance by identifying inefficiencies and pushing companies to improve, which is why leadership teams should keep an activist lens embedded in their planning processes. Understanding where they stand relative to peers enables companies to stay ahead of investors, rather than allowing an activist narrative to define the company’s future. Breakups may deliver a quick premium, but companies that close performance gaps early with a credible value plan retain control of their strategy and compound value over time."

Read the article

6/7/2026

Activist Investors Come to Japan and Are Not Always Unwelcome

Times (UK) (06/07/26) Parry, Richard Lloyd

For decades, even after the vast growth of its equity markets in the 1980s, Japan’s shareholders were the opposite of activist. Listed companies were run by their boards; stocks were largely owned by other companies, often members of the same corporate family, which were disinclined to challenge governance and decision-making. So docile, formulaic and scripted were shareholder meetings that there was a category of extortionist, called sokaiya, who would blackmail companies with the threat of simply standing up in an annual meeting and asking aggressive questions. Foreign investors who attempted takeovers were met with hostility, obstructionism and poison pills. But in the past decade, and with increasing pace in the past few years, the situation has changed. Activist investors — Japanese, as well as foreign — are on the rise. According to Lazard, there were 56 shareholder activist campaigns in Japan last year, more than in all the countries of Europe put together. IR Japan, a consultancy, counted 75 activist investors operating in Japan in 2025, compared with fewer than 50 five years earlier. In the past few months, the Singapore-based fund Effissimo successfully took over the maker of car care products, Soft99 (TYO: 4464), after winning over shareholders previously loyal to the founding family. The biggest investor drama of the year occurred when Elliott Management won a victory by successfully pressuring Toyota Motor (TYO: 7203) to pay a higher price for shares in a subsidiary that it wished to privatize. The U.S. hedge fund has previously mounted campaigns against SoftBank (TYO: 9984), Toshiba, and Tokyo Gas (TYO: 9531). Elliott successfully persuaded fellow investors to hold out for a higher offer for Toyota Industries (TYO: 6201), a manufacturer of auto parts and forklift trucks, in which it had amassed a stake of 7.7%. By some estimates the success in March of its “bumpitrage,” the term for an activist using its influence to force a bidder to to increase their offer, brought the fund an extra 80 billion yen (£372 million). “Japan had this insider capitalism, where corporate control came from within the company, and not from the external shareholders,” says Jesper Koll, an economist and director of the Monex Group. “This has completely changed. And now Japan has become open — open to attack.” The change is part of the historical transformation of Japanese business from the days of the zaibatsu — family conglomerates, such as Mitsubishi (TYO: 8058), Mitsui (TYO: 8031), and Sumitomo (TYO: 8053) that dominated prewar business in the country. They gave way in the second half of the 20th century to the keiretsu, looser industrial affiliations that were nonetheless linked to one another by complex webs of cross-ownership. The keiretsu functioned as giant industrial department stores, providing member companies with many essential services, and reducing the need to shop elsewhere. Thus, having secured loans from the Mitsubishi Bank and purchased land through Mitsubishi Real Estate, the Mitsubishi keiretsu member would typically hire Mitsubishi Construction to build its new factory with materials from Mitsubishi Metal and trucks from Mitsubishi Motors. The companies owned shares in one another; given their networks of mutual backscratching, none was motivated to challenge another’s corporate decision-making. This was the formidable alliance of mutual vested interests, supported by regulators, that faced outsiders who attempted to break in. “There were all these [foreign] barbarians rattling at the gate,” says Koll. “And it was very clear that the Japanese elite across the board, whether it’s the media, whether it’s politicians, whether it’s the corporate world, were circling the wagons to preserve the old system.” Cross-shareholdings have been unwinding from around 50% in the early 1990s to 8%, increasing the opportunities and influence of outside investors. The change has been brought about by new rules imposed by the county’s financial regulator, the Financial Services Agency, and the Tokyo Stock Exchange but also by companies themselves. Institutionally, Japan Inc has come to recognize the damaging lack of competitiveness encouraged by the old arrangements — as well as the efficiencies that activist investors can bring to companies. In the broadest sense, in a country whose population has shrunk by 3.1 million (or 2.5%) in five years, business has no choice but to exploit capital better to compensate for the dwindling of its labor force. Historically, Japanese companies have low capital efficiency, with large reserves of uninvested cash earning virtually no interest. In 2022, the government launched an “asset income doubling plan” to encourage households, as well as businesses, to switch assets from savings to investment. “Companies did not pay dividends — companies hoarded cash,” says Koll. “But the elite has recognized that now you’ve got this headwind from the demographics, you’ve got all these lazy balance sheets, underutilized assets. To continue to grow, you have to sweat those assets harder.” The change of tone can be illustrated with the tale of two unsuccessful takeover bids. In 2007, Warren Lichtenstein’s Steel Partners tried to acquire the old Japanese brand Bull-Dog Sauce (TYO: 2804) — scarcely a sensitive strategic industry. He was successfully blocked and denounced as an “abusive acquirer” by a Japanese court. When Canada’s Couche-Tard’s (TSX: ATD) made a $46 billion bid to buy the chain of 7-11 convenience stores last year, it was also unsuccessful — but the tone of the debate in Japan was quite different, focusing on the quality of the offer, rather than dwelling on the dangers of foreign investment. There is still a perception of foreign activists as predatory opportunists in it only for short-term gain, but plenty of companies, and their shareholders, are seeing the benefits of their interventions in the form of increased equity value. A year ago, Dalton Investments nominated 12 independent directors to the television company Fuji Media Holdings (TYO: 4676); its share price has since risen close to 40%. American and European investors are one thing, but money from Asian competitors and rivals might be harder to accept, especially under a conservative nationalist prime minister, Sanae Takaichi, in an atmosphere of growing suspicion of China and its economic might. This year, for only the second time ever, the Japanese government cited national security in blocking the sale of the machine-tools maker Makino Milling (TYO: 6135), whose products are used in the defense industry, to MBK, a South Korean company.

Read the article

6/4/2026

Japan Railroad Stocks Attract Investors Eyeing Property Holdings

Nikkei Asia (06/04/26) Wada, Taizo; Shimizu, Ataru

Investors are building stakes in Japanese railway operators, betting the companies can unlock greater shareholder value from property holdings and other underutilized assets. Aya Nomura, the eldest daughter of prominent investor Yoshiaki Murakami, now owns about 3% of Kintetsu Group Holdings (TYO: 9041), the Osaka-based rail operator. Nomura's portfolio also includes roughly 2% of Nagoya Railroad (TYO: 9048) and approximately 1% of Keihan Holdings (TYO: 9045), another Osaka rail company. Each interest was disclosed in shareholder meeting notices issued in May. Other investors are leaning into railway stocks. City Index Eleventh, an investment firm formally linked to Murakami, held about 8% of Keikyu (TYO: 9006) as of March. 3D Investment Partners owned approximately 7% of Seibu Holdings (TYO: 9024) as of May. Investors see railway stocks as significantly undervalued. The price-to-book ratio of Nagoya Railroad, also known as Meitetsu, is 0.7. Keihan has a 0.9 P/B ratio. Both multiples are below the liquidation value of 1. Japanese rail companies own a substantial amount of real estate, including train stations and commercial complexes. When the unrealized gains on these properties are taken into account, the stocks appear further undervalued. At the end of March 2025, Nagoya Railroad had unrealized gains of about 50 billion yen ($312 million) on its rental properties. The adjusted P/B ratio, which factors in these gains, dips into the 0.6 range. Investors believe that asset efficiency can be improved by selling real estate that rail companies are not fully utilizing, or by partnering with external real estate companies to redevelop the properties. Nomura appears to be urging Nagoya Railroad to bring in outside partners. A revision of Japan's corporate governance code planned for summer will likely become a tailwind for investors. The revised code will add a section for real assets like real estate, stating that "constant verification should be conducted, including whether they are being effectively utilized for growth investments." Some railway companies are embarking on management reforms. Seibu shifted its management focus to real estate in 2024, adopting a rotational model to sell real estate holdings to funds and reinvest the proceeds into growth areas. In December 2024, Seibu announced the sale of Tokyo Garden Terrace Kioicho, a mixed-use building on the former site of the Akasaka Prince Hotel, to U.S. asset manager Blackstone for about 400 billion yen. Going forward, it will focus on redevelopment projects in Tokyo's Takanawa and Shiba Park areas.

Read the article

6/4/2026

Commentary: Elliott Investment Management Pressures Northern Star as Gold Miner Hunts for New Chief Executive

Australian (06/04/26) Carter, Bridget

The Australian columnist Bridget Carter writes that Elliott Investment Management has bought into Northern Star Resources (ASX: NST), cranking up pressure on the $31 billion gold miner at an already delicate moment. The board, led by the highly experienced Michael Chaney – who also chairs Wesfarmers – has acknowledged Elliott’s correspondence and offered the standard language about welcoming constructive dialogue. But this board will not be easily moved. Elliott’s implicit push for a sale is generating noise, but deal sources say none of the obvious suitors – South Africa’s Gold Fields (NYSE: GFI), AngloGold Ashanti (NYSE: AU), or Canada’s Agnico Eagle (NYSE: AEM) – are actively looking at the business. Agnico in particular appears to be digesting its recent acquisitions of Aurion Resources and Rupert Resources in Finland, deals worth more than $3 billion combined that have already punished its share price. A tilt at Northern Star, for now, looks unlikely. Northern Star shares were down 6% on Thursday to $20.39. The discount to what this business could be worth under different management – or different ownership – is precisely what Elliott is leaning on. But most of those close to the situation do not believe there is a deal to be done, despite all the noise. The more pressing issue – and the best defense against the activists – is finding a new chief executive, and finding one fast. The board confirmed the search for a replacement for outgoing chief executive Stuart Tonkin is under way, with an international search firm appointed and candidate discussions already taking place. Tonkin is due to depart in the first quarter of the 2027 financial year, ending a decade at the helm of Australia’s largest listed gold miner. Sources say what Tonkin has been dealing with at Northern Star is genuinely complex and challenging – the criticism, such as it is, has been directed less at the operational difficulties themselves than at how they were communicated to the market. A string of production downgrades, significant operational headaches at Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines and a bruising analyst call have defined his final chapter. The board has already sent a signal by declining to appoint chief operating officer Simon Jessop as interim chief executive – this is firmly an external search. Gold credentials are non-negotiable; a parachute hire from a diversified miner such as BHP (NYSE: BHP) or Rio Tinto (ASX: RIO) would not be well received. Senior executives at majors such as Newmont (NYSE: NEM) or Gold Fields are seen as the preferred profile. Turnaround specialist Mick McMullen has been mentioned but is understood to be occupied with his own ventures. There has also been a broader talent drain from mid-tier gold miners, with a number of executives poached by the likes of Genesis Minerals (ASX: GMD), run by Raleigh Finlayson, which has not helped Northern Star’s internal bench. Elliott may be loud, but the board holds the cards – for now. The fastest way to silence an activist is to appoint a chief executive the market believes in. That appointment cannot come soon enough.

Read the article

6/2/2026

Commentary: Elliott Brings the Stick to Whack Northern Star into Shape

Australian Financial Review (06/02/26) Macdonald, Anthony

Anthony Macdonald, an AFR Chanticleer columnist, writes that Elliott Management has picked a target off the top shelf. Gold miner Northern Star Resources (ASX: NST) is rudderless, disliked, not trusted and beset by such management and board upheaval that investors really may be happy to sell it on the cheap. Sell-side analysts gave it to outgoing managing director Stuart Tonkin on his past few earnings calls, while fund managers have dished out their drubbings behind closed doors. Some go as far as to say that Northern Star Chairman Michael Chaney has torched his 30-year legacy of running or chairing big Australian companies, given repeated production downgrades and cost overruns at the gold miner, which is a big call and probably a bit too emotive. But make no mistake, Elliott or no Elliott, the $26.5 billion Northern Star is a big Australian company ripe for a shake-up. Tonkin is going; investors would like more change in the executive ranks, and fund managers and analysts worry about Northern Star’s kitbag of assets (which is worse than worrying about its ability as an operator). Australians should all be cheering for performance approval here – it would be best for the country’s tax take, jobs, economic growth and investors if Northern Star and its assets were all firing. Yet sometimes it takes a lightning rod to spark serious change and, like it or not, Elliott is a lightning rod. This hedge fund is the master of shareholder activism – literally launching five of the 10 biggest activist campaigns in the world in the past quarter, and had a sixth just outside the top 10. Elliott’s presentation is slick, comprehensive and quotes a lot of the angry analysts back to themselves, just to rub them up the right way. There are few new ideas in there – just charts showing Northern Star’s underperformance and under-valuation relative to large gold miner peers globally. It’d be absurd for Northern Star to argue with the core premise that this company hasn’t delivered for shareholders.; Blind Freddy can see it. But there is force in Elliott’s approach, global attention because of its track record and rinse-and-repeat media strategy, and one big idea to coalesce the broader conversation: sell the joint. That’s the big there here. Elliott doesn’t seek to solve Northern Star’s problems other than to say change the management (underway) and try to sell the company, which is underwhelming. To be clear, that’s where Australia’s gold analysts were already going, imploring Tonkin to consider structural, operating and cultural changes required to get more out of its aging assets. Northern Star got full control of the Super Pit when it acquired Saracen Minerals in 2021. Some investors were pushing Northern Star to sell everything outside of the Kalgoorlie Super Pit, its Pogo mine in Alaska and Hemi development in the Pilbara for a once-in-a-generation spring-clean after two decades of growth via M&A. Elliott’s campaign goes one step further; while Goldman Sachs’ (NYSE: GS) investment bankers are in the house and while the board is searching for a new chief executive, try to sell the lot. Elliott’s presentation has a predictable list of theoretical buyers, including big names in gold globally: ex-Orica (ASX: ORI) boss Alberto Calderon’s AngloGold Ashanti (NYSE: AU), Agnico Eagle (NYSE: AEM), Gold Fields (NYSE: GFI), and Newmont (NYSE: NEM). The names are necessary to make the presentation compelling. But how realistic is it that one of these companies would step up That’s the debate that will play out in the coming weeks. These big gold companies all watch each other jealously, forever keen to pick up better assets to lengthen production pipelines, so if Northern Star opened a data room, there’d likely be takers. But is that really the best way to create value? What if such a process failed? Elliott’s already had its chief stonethrowers, including Mark Cicirelli and Chris Singh, who prefer to be seen as friendly and constructive shareholders, on the phone to analysts explaining the “sell-the-joint” pitch. On day one, Australian analysts and fund managers have their doubts. If there was a bid for Northern Star as it is today, where is it? Yes, there are some good assets in there, but you can go through them one by one and make a case that there isn’t a buyer for the lot. Hemi, for example, was on the market for ages before Northern Star bought its owner, De Grey Mining, last year. It is promising but metallurgically complicated, requires a few billion dollars in investment to produce anything, has a 10-year mine life and would take another two or three years of drilling to fulfil its potential The Super Pit and its infrastructure are 37 years old. Northern Star is investing in a new mill, but how can a buyer be confident they can get production up to 900,000 ounces, not 600,000? Apparently, North American investors are more positive that there’s a solid buy case – and Elliott is in that camp. It could be one of those situations where Australians are too close to, or too burnt by, repeated downgrades, and fail to see the forest through all the lopped production targets. Which makes this a bit like Newcrest Mining, sold to Denver-based Newmont in 2023. Newcrest had some A-grade assets, but shareholders were sick of years of poor or underperforming results and pulled the rug out from under the company after a few decades on the stock exchange. In falling to Newmont, Newcrest handed the mantle of the ASX’s biggest gold miner to Northern Star and it benefited from great active and passive investor interest. Now it is Northern Star’s turn. Northern Star shares opened up about 8% on Tuesday morning and climbed throughout the day as fund managers and bankers dug through Elliott’s 39-page presentation and thought “what if?" Northern Star didn’t say much on Tuesday – Chaney’s hard to rattle after a few decades overseeing these sorts of corporate skirmishes. He’s apparently happy to meet Elliott’s representatives, which is the next step in the activist playbook, and you’d love to be a fly on the wall at that meeting. In a statement after lunch, the board said it supported Elliott’s view that it needed to do more to create value for shareholders and that it has Goldman Sachs in its corner. It should have seen Elliott creep onto its share register and had to know about the investor discontent. To show just how this situation was brewing, check out this Q&A from Citi analyst Jack Whelan last month, who was asked a standard list of questions. Has the unlisted/industry feedback been positive or negative for the company? Very negative. Has the amount of investor interest in the company changed in the last month? Significantly more interest. Over the last three to six months, in broad terms, have things been improving/no change/getting worse for this stock? Getting a lot worse. What is the quality of the composition, structure and independence of the board? Very poor. If that doesn’t scream activist target, we’re not sure what does. Elliott was watching and took the bait, confirming that target selection is perhaps the No.1 skill required to have a sustainable activist strategy and $US80 billion fund. There are not many potential targets in Australia – the last time we saw it pop up here was BHP in 2017 with a very different and much more specific list of demands. Northern Star was a sitting duck in comparison. History says something will happen at Northern Star. The board will want to keep Elliott out of its boardroom – directors hate these situations – but it is going to have a tough time deflecting the need to change for investors’ sakes. Because change was already in the air. Elliott just tapped into it.

Read the article

6/2/2026

Most Activist Investors Are Not Really Activist Investors

Financial Times (06/02/26) Elder, Bryce

Here’s a template story that turns up a lot in the financial press: An activist investment group has built a stake in [company whose shares have been dead money for at least a year]. [Some fund you’ve never heard of] has acquired close to [the percentage disclosure threshold] of the company over the past [vague timescale]. The activist is supportive of the company and believes its stock is undervalued by the public markets, according to a person familiar with the situation. Shareholder value could unlocked through a series of self-help measures including a review of governance and board composition, improved disclosure, an evaluation of operational targets, and an assessment of the capital allocation policy to ensure better use of its balance sheet, the person said. Previous targets for [some fund you’ve never heard of] have included [a different company whose shares had been dead money for least a year], where it successfully lobbied for [corporate changes that were already being planned before it turned up]. The regularity with which such stories appear might suggest, to a cynical reader, that “activist investor” means very little. Handily, a report published today by the EMEA Sustainable Investing Research team at JPMorgan (NYSE: JPM) points at a similar conclusion. JPM finds the vast majority of activists aren’t active. Between 2018 and 2026 year-to-date, 70% of activists were involved in only one campaign and 82% in no more than two, they found. Only 4% of funds participated in at least 10 campaigns over the period. Of the active activists, there’s Elliott Investment Management, and then there’s everyone else. This “small core of sophisticated repeat players” is where returns cluster. JPM’s team finds that core activists (meaning those involved in at least 10 campaigns since 2018) generate 9% positive alpha over their less engaged counterparts over one and two years. News of an activist on the shareholder list will usually deliver a share price pop, but it burns out quickly. After a year, target outperformance has fully reversed. Narrowing the above chart to only core activists shows how much it’s the opportunists who are dragging down the average. There’s no significant difference between core- and non-core by the type of companies targeted. Whereas institutional activism was. once focused on operationally weak companies, the trend this century has been to find companies that lack financial distress but are underperforming peers by valuation. Everyone is hunting for the cheap and the fixable. Based on public campaigns, debt-funded cash returns have become the second most popular quick-fix demand after “strategic review,” JPM finds. Operational and governance demands are well out of fashion. Of course, there’s a big gap between an activist’s demands when starting a campaign and what happens after it calls an end to hostilities. JPM finds that only 37% of activist campaigns succeed in all objectives. Sustained outperformance among the small number of core activists is easiest to explain by superior campaign execution. Odds of victory improve when there’s a credible proxy threat or a mutiny, which favors a type of experienced activist who knows how to escalate threats. Operational stuff, like fixing a lazy balance sheet, is much easier to reject. That’s unfortunate because — measured by subsequent share price performance — improved cash returns represent the best outcome for a targeted company’s shareholders. Takeovers are also good, though after a while it becomes difficult to attribute bid interest to an activist campaign. The worst thing an activist can deliver at a target company is change. “CEO changes and strategic reviews — despite representing activist victories — are associated with significant negative alpha over a one- to two-year horizon,” JPM says. Also: “board seat gains, often cited as the primary measure of activist success, generate no statistically significant alpha on its own over our analysis horizon, potentially reflecting the time required for board level changes to translate into operational improvements.” JPM’s study does nothing to change the perception that activism is largely goal-hanging. It’s not enough to just turn up at any badly run company, demanding management changes and strategic reviews. These sorts of targets are, by financial metrics, too unremarkable. On average, campaigns only succeed when the target has enough balance-sheet slack to improve distributions, or has a compressed valuation and return on capital low enough to attract a predator. Successful activist campaigns don’t improve operating performance, they encourage a shift of capital allocation priorities, JPM finds. Serial activists succeed not because they win bigger concessions, but because their threats are taken seriously. Their victories are more durable. Activism of any size causes operational disruption, which shows up in metrics like revenue growth and return on invested capital. A company that’s trying to fend off the attentions of Elliott, Starboard Value or Murakami will tend to put in place a progressive dividend policy. But when the activist is minor-league, it’s enough to convince them to go away. JPM finds that, by year two, companies targeted by non-core activists had already reset their dividends back to the pre-campaign level. Finally, a note on methodology. JPM’s study uses Bloomberg’s activism database. The number of worldwide targets added to it each year has held steady just above 300 since 2022, but with a growing trend towards “private” campaigns. This makes it an imperfect measure. Rather than engage in open warfare, investors have been increasingly keen to let their dissatisfactions be known by pseudonymous media leaks. Does this mean more activists have been choosing the quiet approach over an expensive proxy fight? Or are we hearing about routine conversations more regularly, as another hedge fund manager with buyers’ remorse adopts the activist playbook? As JPM says, the “boundary between private activism and routine engagement is not always easy to untangle.” We in the media have not always been helpful to the process of untangling. Sorry about that.

Read the article

6/1/2026

The Honeywell Lifer Deconstructing a 141-Year-Old Industrials Empire

Financial Times (06/01/26) Barnes, Oliver; Davies, Christian

Vimal Kapur started at Honeywell (NASDAQ: HON) in 1989, selling Indian oil refineries the networks of sensors and controls that keep industry running with less need for labor. As he climbed through the ranks, moving from India to the UK to the United States, a regular churn of deals transformed Honeywell into a $150 billion industrial conglomerate straddling aerospace and automation, making everything from aircraft control systems to security cameras. Now CEO, Kapur is presiding over a new era for the company and sector. Honeywell is breaking up, and investors including formidable Elliott Management are looking to him to execute a complex split of the 141-year-old conglomerate into three parts. An electrical engineer by training, Kapur has risen to the task of rewiring its circuitry. “Companies need to find their strategic direction and take their shareholders along with them,” he says. “We’re a public company — I’m just another employee at the end of the day.” When Honeywell spins off its aerospace division from its automation business at the end of the month, it will become the last of U.S. industrial bellwethers to engineer a break-up as demands from investors for focus over sprawl usher in the end of corporate America’s conglomerate era. The spree of asset sales and carve-outs pushed corporate divestitures to a total of $1.2 trillion last year, the highest level for three years, according to LSEG. On June 29, Honeywell Aerospace, a division generating $15 billion in annual sales which makes aircraft control systems, cockpit displays and black box recorders, will be listed as a standalone company, marking the culmination of a gargantuan effort. The split, alongside a spin-off of the company’s chemical business, will leave Kapur in charge of the remainder of the company. Its rebrand, as Honeywell Technologies, was formally announced on Monday. Billed as the first megacap U.S. company focused purely on automation, Honeywell Technologies is hoping the artificial intelligence revolution will propel its growth yet further, with systems able to predict failures before they happen, or optimize operations to be more productive and energy efficient. Elliott remains a big shareholder, after building a $5 billion stake in Honeywell, one of the biggest in the fund’s history. In a 23-page letter in November 2024, the fund called for Honeywell — an “iconic pillar of the American industrial complex” — to shed its conglomerate structure, citing its poor share price performance and uneven execution. Splitting the company into aerospace and automation, it said, could yield a share price improvement of up to 75%. Most chief executives would be uneasy at any appearance of Elliott in their second year in the job, never mind with a historic stake and transformational demands. Kapur was unfazed. Unbeknown to Elliott, the groundwork for a break-up was already well under way. “The content of the letter was not surprising — our reaction wasn’t ‘What is this?’ We had been working on [a break-up] for like a year,” says Kapur. “You have to treat an activist shareholder like any other shareholder. If you have strategic clarity, you’re in a good place because you can articulate: ‘Oh, you’re right, here is a reason why, or you’re wrong here is a reason why’.” Kapur started as chief executive in June 2023 knowing Honeywell needed to be simplified, he says. The aerospace industry was entering a monumental upswing after a lull during the Covid-19 pandemic. The launch of OpenAI’s GPT-4 brought attention to automation as the next frontier of the technological revolution. And rival GE’s (NYSE: GE) own three-way break-up had been cheered by investors. “I saw Vimal acting with conviction about what needed to be done at Honeywell. It’s an iconic company but he was clear about the changes that were needed,” says Indra Nooyi, PepsiCo’s (NASDAQ: PEP) former chief executive who joined Honeywell’s board last December. “Everybody’s leaning in with a level of optimism I’ve never seen in separations.” Kapur’s ambitions for Honeywell Technologies are not small. “We believe that we have created a footprint in which you can create a $100 billion-plus market cap company,” says Kapur. “We have a good base. We’ll see: we may get there in five years, three or seven. Markets decide that, I don’t decide that.” A cause for confidence: shares in GE Vernova are up more than 600% since its spin-off in April 2024, giving it a market value of $270 billion. The boss might draw confidence from Honeywell’s first step towards breaking up. The company unveiled the spin-off of its speciality chemicals business Solstice Advanced Materials (NASDAQ: SOLS) in October 2024. Its shares are up 86 per cent since it listed last October. Kapur has also orchestrated the public listing of Honeywell’s quantum computing division Quantinuum, which is poised to list in early June in an upsized offering valuing the start-up at as much as $12.7 billion. The company has also cleaned up its balance sheet and resolved $1.4 billion of asbestos liabilities, while navigating the impact of the Trump administration’s tariff policy and war. Preparing an expansive conglomerate like Honeywell for a separation is no small task. Kapur and his team had to handpick the management and boards of Solstice and Honeywell Aerospace. He has pressed ahead with a $14 billion bolt-on acquisition spree to keep bolstering Honeywell’s capabilities. And he has even sold off parts of the business, including most recently offloading its Productivity Solutions and Services business, behind Honeywell-branded barcode scanners, to industrials group Brady (NYSE: BRC). All while continuing to run a group with more than 100,000 employees globally, which generated $37.4 billion in revenues last year. Was Kapur bothered that Elliot revealed its stake and demands midway through his own planning for Honeywell’s separation? “I don’t care,” he says. “What matters is output not perceptions.” Instead, he was impressed by the detail of Elliott’s research cited in the first letter from managing partner Jesse Cohn and his colleague Marc Steinberg, who expressed “a desire to work together to help Honeywell achieve its full potential." Weeks after the letter was published, Kapur met with Elliott executives to signal to them Honeywell was already full speed ahead on a break-up. Steinberg was added to Honeywell’s board last year as part of a co-operation agreement with the fund. For Kapur, Steinberg was a welcome addition, bringing extensive capital markets experience. “I’ve worked with Marc, I’ve met him three or four times — I found him extremely professional and very thoughtful,” says Kapur. The feeling is reciprocated. “When we first started talking with Vimal, it was clear we were looking at Honeywell the same way,” says Steinberg. “The transformation since then has been remarkable — a three-way break-up, multiple acquisitions and divestitures, balance sheet simplification and the IPO of Quantinuum. This has been a bold evolution of Honeywell...It has been a pleasure working with Vimal.” Kapur now receives phone calls from other chief executives under pressure from activist investors seeking his counsel. His advice is simple: “If I cannot explain the rationale of what I’m doing to my shareholders then the problem is with me, not that activist or anybody else who wants to have a point of view.” Running such a vast industrials group has presented other challenges. The output of Honeywell’s aerospace division has been held back by supply chain constraints stemming from huge demands on small-parts manufacturers, which have been made worse by the U.S. conflict in Iran. Moreover, Honeywell had to grapple with a tariff bill from U.S. President Donald Trump’s policy which could add up to $500 million a year. As a Honeywell lifer, whose 37-year career has taken him from the Indian city of Pune to the C-suite in Charlotte, North Carolina, Kapur is an unlikely change agent. But he is within touching distance of ushering in the biggest transformation in Honeywell’s history. “I always operated in different parts of Honeywell as a business leader but never had to think about the future of Honeywell,” says Kapur reflecting on his path to the top. “That was not my job — I was not here to advise the CEO: ‘You should break up the company’. My past experience has been very helpful but we obviously have to all learn new skills once you get into the CEO role.”

Read the article

5/28/2026

TCI (Cellnex) and Third Point (Indra) Make Spain World’s 7th Largest Market for “Activist Funds,” With Positions Worth $3.97 Billion

The Corner (05/28/26)

Spain ranks as the seventh largest market in the world – in terms of the market value of positions held by activist investors – according to the ‘Sodali 40’ report, which estimates the aggregate value of these investments in Spanish companies at $3,970.7 million at the end of the first quarter. This means that, within the European context, Spain is the fourth market with the highest level of activist penetration, behind only France, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. The value of activist positions in Spain shows a year-on-year growth of 8.8% (comparing March 2025 with March 2026), although on a quarterly basis, it remained relatively stable with a slight increase of 0.9% compared to December 2025. The report specifically mentions the activities of Third Point, the U.S. fund that holds a stake in Indra (BME: IDR) and actively supports the creation of a ‘Spanish defense rollup.’ Although the fund led by Dan Loeb claims to hold less than 3% of the capital – which means it is not required to disclose details of its stake – it has threatened a fall in the share price if Indra does not proceed with its merger with EM&E, the company owned by the Escribano brothers. But the most prominent example of corporate activism in Spain is undoubtedly the position taken by the British fund TCI (The Children's Investment Fund) – led by the billionaire and investor Chris Hohn – in Cellnex Telecom (CLNX.MC) in recent years. TCI is one of Cellnex's key shareholders, the second-largest shareholder with a 9.38% stake, second only to the Benetton family through Edizione, which holds around 9.9%. TCI's role in Cellnex is a textbook case of successful shareholder activism: In early 2023, TCI burst onto the scene as the main shareholder and launched an aggressive campaign against the board of directors of the telecoms tower company. Chris Hohn harshly criticized the handling of the succession of the then CEO, Tobías Martínez, accusing the board of a “lack of progress” and of mismanaging the process. TCI demanded (and secured) radical changes in record time: The dismissal of the then non-executive chairman, Bertrand Kan. The departure of several independent directors. The appointment of Anne Bouverot as the new chair of the board. Securing a seat on the board for its representative, Jonathan Amouyal. TCI’s aim was not merely to change faces, but to force a 180-degree shift in Cellnex’s business model. Historically, Cellnex had grown very aggressively by purchasing thousands of mobile phone towers across Europe, financing this with a large amount of debt. With the rise in global interest rates, TCI pressed for a halt to the massive acquisitions and a shift to a strategy dubbed ‘The Next Chapter,’ centered on: Reducing debt: Focusing on financial discipline to achieve and maintain an investment grade credit rating from agencies such as S&P. Sale of non-strategic assets: To accelerate deleveraging, they supported the sale of Cellnex’s businesses in countries such as Ireland (for nearly €1 billion) and Austria. Shareholder returns: Changing the allocation of free cash flow (FCF). Once the balance sheet has stabilized between 2024 and 2025, the focus has shifted to share buybacks and increased dividends. Following the appointment of Marco Patuano as CEO (an executive very much in line with the demands for efficiency and capital control), the waters seem to have calmed.

Read the article

5/28/2026

Dan Loeb Says Tech Is the Most Attractive Sector Right Now — Unless You Hold This ‘Draconian’ View

MarketWatch (05/28/26) Goldstein, Steve

Dan Loeb, the hedge-fund veteran famed for boardroom fights and value investing, is leaning into the rally that has propelled tech stocks higher. Loeb, the founder and chief executive of the hedge fund Third Point, was asked on an episode of the podcast “Invest Like the Best” that was aired on Thursday for his thoughts on megacap tech companies. “I think the setup is great,” Loeb replied. He said he had considered taking profits in Nvidia (NASDAQ: NVDA), for instance, but then looked at the valuation and growth rate. “Unless you are really draconian or negative and you think that somehow the AI world is going to roll over in ’31 or ’32, I think it’s the most attractive sector right now. It’s where the bulk of our capital is invested.” Loeb’s first-quarter shareholder letter noted diversified gains in semiconductors, memory, semicap equipment, power infrastructure, aerospace and defense positions that helped the firm’s flagship fund outperform the S&P 500, albeit still falling 0.6% between January and March. Loeb also was asked about the hardest investment lesson he has been taught. “I would have to say our investment in FTX,” Loeb replied, referring to the now-bankrupt cryptocurrency brokerage, which collapsed in 2022 after customer funds were found to have been misappropriated. “It looked great. The company was growing fast. We could verify it all on the blockchain, felt like we had some good company on the cap table with us.” Loeb also noted the astute venture-capital investments that founder Sam Bankman-Fried had made in companies including Anthropic and Cursor. “One of the amazing things about our capitalist system is that venture-backed companies have this incredible ability to go out and raise capital for interesting ideas,” Loeb said. “Most people are good actors with good intentions. We've rarely had any kind of mishap.” The due-diligence process, he said, now includes checking bank balances. Loeb discussed his triumphs, as well, citing his firm’s investments in the debt of Elon Musk’s Twitter. “The Twitter debt was a resale of the financing debt that was offered when Elon bought the company. Morgan Stanley (NYSE: MS) sat on it for a while. It was deep underwater. When it got close to par, they decided to sell it,” said Loeb. “Most credit investors were really scared and nervous to buy that, even though it was like 96, 97 cents on the dollar [and] it was yielding around a 12% yield. We were comfortable enough with the underlying value of the business and with the fundamentals that we made that, at that time, our largest credit position.” Later, when Musk’s xAI financed debt, Loeb said very few credit investors wanted it because there were no cash flows. “But we were very comfortable that this was a real business. We looked at them [from the perspective of] credit investors, but we also were able to bring in the resources of our private investing knowledge.”

Read the article

5/28/2026

Figma Gets an Investor. Exhibit A on Why Companies Don’t Want to Go Public.

Barron's (05/28/26) Wolf, Nate

Figma’s (NYSE: FIG) first year as a public company hasn’t gone well. Now the design software maker has an investor to deal with. Hedge fund Findell Capital Management, which has an undisclosed stake in Figma, issued a letter Thursday to Figma’s chief executive and board, urging changes at the company. Figma needs to take steps to shed its unwarranted reputation as an artificial-intelligence “loser,” Findell argued. Figma didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. Figma shares surged 6.2% to $22.67 on Thursday—a welcome gain for a stock down 31% from its initial public offering price of $33 a share last July. Shares have tumbled ever since spiking 250% on the company’s first day of trading. As if the price volatility and fears about AI weren’t enough, the activist campaign underlines one downside of an IPO. Public companies have to answer to any number of potential shareholders, and battles with investors can play out for the whole world to see. As far as activist campaigns go, Findell’s isn’t the worst to manage. The firm isn’t a widely feared investor giant like Elliott Management or Trian Partners, and its stake is likely small. The firm’s requests, meanwhile, don’t include extreme changes like selling the company or ousting CEO Dylan Field. Rather, Findell urged Figma to trim its product suite down to its core design, coding, and virtual whiteboard tools. The firm also called for a reduction in research and design costs and stock-based compensation. The latter equaled about 8% of revenue in the most recent quarter. The final request directly addressed potential disruption by AI design and coding tools. Anthropic product executive Mike Krieger resigned from Figma’s board on April 14, three days before Anthropic released Figma competitor Claude Design, Findell pointed out. “This pattern of events raises serious corporate governance concerns,” wrote Findell’s Brian Finn, adding that two remaining board members appear to be investors in Anthropic. “We believe the Board should conduct an independent investigation to evaluate whether Anthropic benefited from any improper use of Figma’s confidential information.” Anthropic didn’t immediately respond to Barron’s request for comment. Figma is one of a relatively low number of companies to test the public markets in the last few years. Just 90 companies went public in the United States in 2025, according to data from University of Florida professor Jay Ritter. That is down from an average of more than 400 per year throughout the 1990s. The median age of businesses going public in 2025 was 12 years, well above the historical median of 9 years. Activist challenges aren’t a major reason why start-ups stay private for longer. Academic research has pointed to a decline in business dynamism, abundant private funding, intangible-focused investing, regulatory costs, and other factors behind the downturn in IPOs. Good, old-fashioned volatility may be another explanation. But scrutiny from hedge funds certainly isn't something executives look forward to. And with private funding serving as an attractive alternative to an IPO, why deal with frustrated investors, regulators, and sell-side analysts if you don't need to? “Public companies operate under constant scrutiny: quarterly earnings pressure, extensive reporting requirements, and growing compliance costs,” Ryan Ferrell, an advisor at TritonPoint Wealth, wrote in a blog post earlier this year. “For many founders and management teams, that environment can be distracting.” Add another distraction to the list for Figma.

Read the article

5/27/2026

After Bitter Proxy Fight, Lululemon CEO Could Use War Chest to Revamp Bruised Brand

Reuters (05/27/26) Kaye, Danielle

Hard-hit Lululemon Athletica (LULU.O) has ended a months-long proxy fight with founder Chip Wilson that weighed on its shares amid weakening brand appeal. Shares in the sports apparel brand tumbled nearly 60% in the past year and roughly 9% in just the last month as the proxy war intensified, new competitors emerged and the firm grappled with a leadership transition. But the truce announced on Wednesday clears the way for incoming CEO Heidi O’Neill to focus on Lululemon's overlooked strength: a $1.8 billion net cash treasure chest that the Canadian company could use to invest in new products, revamp retail outlets and push into under-tapped markets. "Lululemon generates far more cash than it needs to cover its expansion plans," said David Swartz, a senior equity analyst at Morningstar. "The issue is, what should the investments be" Since Wilson listed Lululemon nearly two decades ago, affluent female shoppers - particularly in the core North American market - have associated the brand with its sophisticated leggings and yoga pants. But competition in the athleisure space has intensified. Upstarts including Alo Yoga and Vuori have opened U.S. stores, often near Lululemon locations. Lululemon's key challenge is luring back its loyal North American shoppers with revamped products, said Brian Nagel, a senior analyst at Oppenheimer. This first step may not require a huge capital investment: "It's almost back to the basics: introducing more basic products that encourage the legacy consumer to spend more with the brand." But the war chest may allow for investments to compete in new product categories altogether - footwear, for example. Moreover, with sales in North America accounting for roughly three-quarters of Lululemon's revenue, the brand has potential to grow in overseas markets, notably China and Europe. "You have a brand that is still very portable," Nagel said. "You need to fix the home market, but investing behind that portability makes sense." "The cash flow the company continues to generate gives them more firepower to execute a turnaround," he added. Lululemon's gross margins, though still robust at 56.6% for fiscal year 2025, have narrowed, and operating margins have shrunk to below 20% of revenue. The slowdown has given investors pause about whether the Canadian player can return to the type of growth it once enjoyed. A leadership vacuum has added to Wall Street's concerns about the athleisure giant. O'Neill will not step into her role until September, meaning any tangible changes are unlikely to take effect until next year. "No one is going to step up and commit to a large investment in the company when the new leader of the company doesn’t start until the back to school season is already done," said Randal Konik, an equity analyst at Jefferies. The delay in any fundamental change to Lululemon's product strategy "gives more time for Alo and Vuori to build more stores, to take more share," Konik added. Lululemon's first-quarter results next week will offer the latest snapshot of brand momentum. Investors remain in a wait-and-see mode. But O'Neill is poised to be greeted with a supportive financial backdrop, in contrast to other apparel companies that have endured CEO changes while facing financial distress. When new CEO Bracken Darrell arrived at Vans owner VF Corp (VFC.N) in 2023, for instance, he was confronted with more than $5 billion in net debt. A series of divestitures have reduced the company's debt load, but the financial struggles have delayed its turnaround. "I don't think Lululemon is in that situation," said Swartz, of Morningstar. "The company is in much better shape."

Read the article

5/21/2026

Is Chris Hohn Britain’s Answer to Warren Buffett?

Financial Times (05/21/26) Mourselas, Costas; Pollard, Amelia

It’s a sunny April afternoon in London and the spirit of God is moving upon Sir Chris Hohn. The UK’s most successful hedge fund manager holds an intense gaze as he quotes a Hindu mystic, bathed in light streaming in from the windows of his corner office on London’s Clifford Street. “God is not a man in the sky with a white beard,” Hohn recites softly, dressed modestly in a beige suit and white shirt. “Close your eyes, and in the darkness you can know God and God is consciousness.” Most hedge fund managers prioritize earthly matters over the business of the soul. But then most hedge fund managers are not like Hohn. Hohn, 59, is perhaps the closest thing Britain has to Warren Buffett. His Children’s Investment Fund (TCI) has become the fifth most profitable hedge fund of all time, last year bringing in more profits after fees than any other firm. Yet unlike its behemoth rivals Citadel and Millennium that employ thousands of people, his fund has done this with around half a dozen elite analysts and one all-powerful portfolio manager at the helm. Where other hedge funds of a similar size spread wagers across thousands of investments, Hohn has built his record of success on a series of colossal multibillion-dollar bets, currently managing roughly $77 billion in only 15 positions globally. His success as an investor has allowed him to turn his charitable foundation into one of the UK’s largest, giving away billions to public health, climate and children’s causes. Buffett, whom Hohn speaks to often, tells the FT his record is “exceptional." Hohn is driven by deep convictions: friends and former colleagues describe an investor of supreme self-confidence, a fierce activist unafraid to confront unruly executives, and a devoted philanthropist who personally gave away more than £1 billion last year. “Most of us see the world in shades of grey, where there are three or five things which are important to an investment thesis,” Rishi Sunak, the former UK prime minister who once worked at the fund, tells the FT. “Chris has an incredible ability to think in black and white. He focuses on one, maybe two things that drive the investment thesis and then has the confidence to scale up the bet so it’s a big part of the fund.” This iron certitude extends from finance to faith; when he is asked about the spiritual beliefs that inspire him, Hohn corrects the question’s premise. He “knows,” he says, rather than believes. Yet his convictions are increasingly being tested. A wave of advances in AI is crashing against his portfolio and challenging his biggest holdings. His fund’s largest investment, a roughly $14 billion position in jet engine manufacturer GE Aerospace (NYSE: GE), is down around 7% this year as the Iran war hits the global airline industry. The fund is down 4.3% to the end of April, the worst start of the year since 2022. In this context, sureties can begin to look like weaknesses. “A lot of the geniuses in this world are wired this way,” says one person who knows him well. “They think they see things nobody else sees. When you take a bet the right way and it’s directional, you crush it. But when things go wrong it can go terribly as well. But that is the main danger.” In a rare, in-depth series of interviews, Hohn says he is unconcerned by the fund’s performance, pointing to previous periods when key stocks in the portfolio fell in half before more than tripling in value. He wants to do the best for his investors, he says, but “we don’t control them.” If they decide to pull out, “why would I cry? Maybe I’ll do better?” It is folly to say concentrated investors are destined to fail, he says, citing his hero as an example: “The most famous concentrated investor is Warren Buffett. Anyone who knows his work knows he spoke frequently on concentrated investing. No one questions his genius.” Hohn’s investment style and commitment to charity may draw comparisons with Buffett, but the two are starkly different characters. Where the so-called Oracle of Omaha is famous for his folksy charm and cult of personality, Hohn keeps a lower profile. In person, he can be voluble one moment but prickly the next. When he feels challenged he speaks rapidly, often ending sentences with a question: yeah? Do you see that? You with me? But when he speaks of God or of charity, his pace of speaking slows and he becomes softer, gentler. Over six hours of interviews with the FT, spread across several days, he is least open about his upbringing, answering in short, clipped sentences. He was born to Jamaican parents who emigrated to the UK and was raised in Addlestone, Surrey. His childhood was “non-eventful.” His parents were “very poor,” he says, and he felt an “obligation to assist.” When asked if he looked up to any of his family members he answers “no.” “School and university was a way out.” He graduated from Southampton university with a first in economics and accounting, and subsequently studied at Harvard Business School where he met Jamie Cooper, who would become his first wife. Taking a job at hedge fund Perry Capital, Hohn harbored aspirations to make a fortune, which initially put off Cooper. But he won her over with a desire to use those anticipated funds to alleviate suffering, partly resulting from a trip to the Philippines when he saw children living in poverty, court documents say. But he had little doubt of his destiny, he says. “Bob Dylan said from a young age he knew he was going to be successful. He was operating in intuition,” says Hohn. “My intuition, which is the intelligence of the soul, said my purpose here was to help people.” On a simpler level, he loved investing, calling it “one of the purest ways to apply intellect to making money." When Hohn founded The Children’s Investment Fund in 2003, he initially hard-wired philanthropic giving to a sister foundation, to be run by Cooper, in the firm’s founding documents. (He has since broken the link and now gives on a discretionary basis). His early years were fabulously profitable. He generated 42% returns on average, with overwhelming investor interest. Like Buffett, Hohn focuses on big companies with powerful moats that help them stave off competitors. He also holds his positions for an average of nine years, a timeline more akin to a private equity firm than a trader. But unlike Buffett, Hohn spurns a whole host of industries, including banks, utilities, media, and insurers. Hohn says there are perhaps just over 200 companies in the world that are investable and, because of the uncertainties fomented by AI and climate change, that figure is decreasing. In those early days, Hohn’s demands to generate returns and fund the foundation took a toll on the staff helping to generate those profits, some now recall. “He was completely insatiable with a single-mindedness I had never encountered with anyone it was bruising,” says one former employee. “[But] he made everyone that worked with him very rich.” For Hohn, the key metric for any company is pricing power, highly valuing the ability to push through inflation-busting price increases. He is not dazzled by stratospheric revenue growth like other investors. “Chris likes buying global monopolies or duopolies,” says TCI analyst Ben Walker. His investment style is also partly informed by a desire for control. Like Buffett, he thinks of himself as an “owner” of his stocks, rather than a speculator, and it is from this mindset that he acts as an activist to defend his interests in a company. For instance, Hohn does not like to short, or bet against, stocks, because the investor on the other side of the bet can recall their shares at any time and crystallize a loss. Short sellers can also be subject to short squeezes, where investors target them by buying the stocks they are betting against, forcing them to close their position. “I don’t like to hold my destiny to other people,” he says. Through that lens, his highly irregular portfolio starts to make more sense. At its core is 31% in infrastructure, including two Canadian railway firms, Spanish infrastructure company Ferrovial (BME: FER), and French construction company Vinci (EPA: DG). “Railroads, toll roads, airports, cell phone towers,” says Hohn rhythmically, punctuating each category by tearing out a page from an investor deck and slamming it on the coffee table in front of him. It is nearly impossible for rivals to pony up the cash or build a business case to justify a new highway or railway next to an existing one, or to get the regulatory approvals for a new airport. “Is AI going to be able to compete with a toll road or an airport? Probably not,” says Hohn. “Whether an electric car drives on a road or a petrol car [does], it makes no difference.” Perhaps the most characteristic Hohn investment is the GE Aerospace holding. He has put 18% of his entire fund, some $14 billion, into this single stock, a position so large it has little comparison in the hedge fund industry. What rationale could there be for making such a bet? “Airlines are a very competitive industry, thousands of airlines, lots of new entrants, but in aircraft engines there hasn’t been one new entrant for 50 years,” he says briskly. It can take on average 20 years for aircraft designers and builders to invite jet engine manufacturers to make bids, he explains, further narrowing the opportunities for a successful competitor. Even then, they would worry that a new competitor with cheaper engines may have issues that reveal themselves after years of use. “So the answer to the question is we study the barriers to entry very closely,” he says. Former employees say Hohn does not get emotionally attached to stocks, no matter how many years he has remained invested, giving him the flexibility to sell at a moment’s notice if he thinks the thesis has changed. Until recently, for example, the fund had an $8 billion position in Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) — based on the thesis that the company has cornered corporates with a cost-effective bundle of services, such as Office and Teams, that are difficult for upstarts like Zoom to compete with. But the steady drumbeat of productivity tools from AI company Anthropic has raised doubts about its dominance of this space. For Hohn, the thesis had changed. This year, he cut the entirety of the fund’s position. “Chris doesn’t flirt with stocks,” says John Armitage of hedge fund Egerton, one of the most profitable managers of all time and an old mentor of Hohn. “He’s all in, or not in.” ‘I’m quite a direct guy’ The conviction that makes Hohn a committed stockpicker also makes him a fearsome activist. His first scalp, news stories of which are still framed in his office, was the defenestration of Werner Seifert, CEO of the Deutsche Börse (FWF: DB1Gn) stock exchange, in 2005. A smarting Seifert later wrote a book about Hohn’s no-holds-barred campaign, entitled Invasion of the Locusts. Hohn has become known for delivering blunt one-liners at the start of meetings with his targets, because “he can’t help himself,” according to one person that knows him. For example, he met Rajeev Misra, then CEO of SoftBank’s (9984.T) Vision Fund, around six years ago to discuss the financing extended to fraudulent German payments company Wirecard. Around that time, TCI held a rare short against Wirecard. Before saying anything else, Hohn told Misra “what you guys have done over here is very foolish,” according to a person with direct knowledge of the meeting. “I’m quite a direct guy,” says Hohn, when the FT recounts the anecdote. “I think they did do a few foolish financings.” Multiple people close to Hohn say that while he seemed to have a vast intellect, he can struggle with interpersonal relations. “He is not grounded by traditional societal norms,” says one former employee. “He doesn’t mind offending people.” Hohn pushes back against this assessment during a call alongside his second wife Kylie. Did people flag that he was neurodivergent, she asks? “I wouldn’t classify myself as neurodivergent,” he says. “OK,” she replies. Instead, Hohn describes himself as “unconstrained by traditional norms” like “hoard” your money or “run away if something happens” to a stock. Hohn may be a fierce activist, but he is not always a successful one. In 2008, the fund got bogged down in activist battles against U.S. rail company CSX (NASDAQ: CSX) and Japanese electricity wholesaler J-Power (TYO: 9513). Unlike some of its rivals, TCI did not rebound strongly in 2009, leading to redemptions from investors and the departure of staff. There was also the activist campaign to break up Dutch lender ABN Amro on the eve of the 2008 financial crisis. The resulting takeover — then the biggest banking deal of all time — netted $1 billion for the fund. But the payout ended up costing the UK taxpayer billions as toxic mortgage positions ultimately took down the Royal Bank of Scotland (NYSE: NWG), the lead buyer in the ABN Amro consortium. “I learnt over the last 20 years that you are better off to find a great company which is well managed and well governed than try to find a bad company and change the management or sell the company,” Hohn says. It was also a painful time for Hohn personally. A few years later, in 2012, Cooper began divorce proceedings against him. She was eventually granted a £337 million settlement in 2014, at that point, the largest ever recorded in the UK. The case became infamous as Hohn successfully argued that his status as an “unbelievable moneymaker” justified him keeping a larger than ordinary amount of their assets. “The financial crisis and divorce were my dark nights of the soul,” he now says. “Evolution occurs out of suffering.” People around Hohn say that he has moderated himself significantly over the past several years, a point partly made by the tenure of his analyst team, which is on average 14 years. Asked if he is a tough boss, he replies: “I think in my early days as an investor, that was true. There was a desire to really be the best. That desire is still the case today. But I would say I have changed a lot over the last 10 years.” Hohn’s veer towards the transcendental was sparked by his second wife, Kylie, a Harvard-trained academic with a doctorate in Slavic languages, whom he met in 2018. Hohn believes it has not only made him a better person, but a better investor. “When I met her, she said, ‘What do you know about consciousness?’” says Hohn. “I said absolutely nothing. She handed me a pile of books and said, ‘You better start learning, then!’” He adds that from the experiences they have had, he knows that they have had “past lives together." In an interview, Kylie confirms as much. “He leapt along the room on our third date and he said, ‘What the hell is going on, I already know you,’” she says. Already one of Britain’s most generous and prolific givers to charity through his foundation, Hohn has recently turned his philanthropic attention to spiritual causes. He co-founded what he says is the only UK charity dedicated to spiritual education, LightEn, with his wife. Annual reports in the foundation’s first three years of operation since 2023 show TCI contributed £29.3 million. The organization is centered around two retreats. The first, which Hohn has visited, is off the coast of Spain in Mallorca and run by the spiritual educator Zulma Reyo. Her book Inner Alchemy: The Path of Mastery, includes an acknowledgement to the Hohns. The other is under construction on more than 480 verdant acres in North Carolina, which Kylie Hohn hopes will begin operation next year. “It’s scattering many seeds of change but through love and connection to the highest aspect of ourselves,” she says. Ultimately, the Hohns want to help people better connect with their souls, which they argue would allow for greater empathy between human beings and hopefully an end to wars. “Humanity is on the wrong path and the state of consciousness of the world is not where it needs to be,” Chris Hohn says. “We need to choose peace not war. We need to choose love not hate.” People that know Hohn say he has been far happier since meeting Kylie and taking his spiritual turn — even if they have to put up with lengthy lectures on spiritual matters. “The worst thing about seeing Chris is you will get a one-hour lecture about spirituality, and if you’re a friend you get 40 links about spirituality or the next life,” jokes one person close to him. “All of his friends are happy to see him happy.” But Hohn’s dedication to spirituality and historic donations to causes including climate change — he has been a significant backer of the Extinction Rebellion activist group — can be seen to conflict with his work on maximizing profits as a hedge fund investor. For instance, his investments in Safran (Euronext Paris: SAF), GE, and Airbus (Euronext Paris: AIR) are all indirectly supporting companies that are helping countries re-arm. After being among the most vocal investors on climate change a few years ago, forcing companies to set out climate plans, he has more recently held off publicly pushing his companies to take even stronger action. Hohn admits grappling with the conundrum, and says his son has made the same observation. “My mindset had always been, maximize the profits and give the money to charity the charity can have the greatest leverage with the most money,” he says. However, he brings it back to his work in spreading spirituality, adding that this delineation may not be necessary: “If investors were more conscious, they would back more funds that were more impact-focused than profit-focused. “I do think we need to move to a world where we have more conscious investors where maybe they say part of my portfolio can go to making money. But another part must go towards having impact in the world,” he adds. Hohn says his spiritual outlook has made him a better investor because while “analysis is part of investing, intuition is another part." But he is no less demanding than he was. He recently threatened that each director of Spanish airport operator Aena (BME: AENA) would be personally liable if it did not raise its airline tariffs sufficiently. And his unyielding nature endures. The fund retains large positions in rating agencies S&P and Moody’s (NYSE: MCO), which make up 17% of the portfolio, and Visa (NYSE: V), which is 13%, as of the end of March. All have suffered so far this year as investors question their viability in the new age of AI. On rating agencies, he says, the real investment is in trust. “Investors have to trust [a rating], issuers have to trust it, regulators have to trust it. All this debt is held by insurance, pension and banks and you need a single source of trust.” “Buffett told me [about Moody’s]: if the financial crisis didn’t kill it, nothing will,” says Hohn. “He made me pledge that if we ever sold our shares in Moody’s we would sell to each other.” He has reached a stage, however, where losses hurt less than they once did. Roughly $12 billion of the fund’s capital is his, and consequently he is far less concerned about losing his investors if there is a dip in returns like in 2008. Even if his returns fell from 20% a year to 10%, he says, in seven years he would double his money to over $20 billion. “[If investors] say active management is dead, or you didn’t do well, it doesn’t matter,” says Hohn. “Go compound $20 billion at 10 or 15% a year [and] it’s more money than I can spend charitably.” He does not accrue yachts and holiday homes like other billionaires; he drives a Toyota Prius and wears a cheap plastic watch. Once again, he quotes a familiar figure to put his future into perspective. “Warren Buffett was asked when he invested in Coca-Cola (NYSE: KO) [if] it was a risky investment,” says Hohn. “He said it depends on your time horizon. For my capital in the fund I can have a forever time horizon.”

Read the article

5/20/2026

Elliott Ramps Up Its AI Efforts With Key Hire From Blackstone

Bloomberg (05/20/26) Parmar, Hema; Singh, Preeti

Elliott Investment Management hired former Blackstone Inc. (NYSE: BX) executive Teresa Sweeney to run the roughly $80 billion hedge fund firm’s global research and data science group. Sweeney joined this month and is expected to build out artificial intelligence for the unit, which houses about 40 research members and three data scientists who handle due diligence and research for prospective deals, according to people familiar with the matter. Paul Singer’s firm, known for its activist campaigns, aims to create a single repository that houses its data and research that can be accessed companywide and utilizes AI. It also plans to use AI to amplify the firm’s proprietary insights. Elliott’s research and data science group works with expert networks, manages data procurement and third-party data sets and conducts background checks. Sweeney worked at Blackstone for about four years, overseeing strategy for its data science team and holding the title of chief operating officer for that group, according to her LinkedIn profile. She previously worked with private equity clients for consulting firm GLG. Like other hedge funds, Elliott is utilizing AI internally and betting on the technology, including making a multibillion-dollar investment in Synopsys Inc. (NASDAQ: SNPS) with the goal of pushing for changes at the chip-design software maker.

Read the article

5/19/2026

Editorial: The Proxy Advisers Strike Back

Wall Street Journal (05/19/26)

The WSJ editorial board writes that proxy advisers Glass Lewis and Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) "are back to their bad old ways of bullying companies. This month the duopoly joined New York City Comptroller Mark Levine’s campaign to stop Exxon Mobil (NYSE: XOM) from vamoosing to Texas." Exxon investors will vote on the company’s plan to move its legal home to Texas from New Jersey at its annual shareholder meeting on May 27. In announcing the move, Exxon noted that Texas has established specialized business courts “designed to resolve complex disputes efficiently” and that “apply clear, statute based standards.” Texas also lets companies domiciled in the state require that investors hold at least $1 million in market value, or 3% of voting shares, for six months to submit shareholder proposals. Companies can also require shareholders to own at least 3% of shares to bring lawsuits for breaches of fiduciary duty and self-dealing. Activists with little stake in companies have abused the shareholder proxy process to drive their environmental, social and governance (ESG) political agenda. This includes resolutions requiring CO2 emission cuts and workforce diversity audits. Plaintiff firms and government pension funds are using shareholder lawsuits to shake down companies. It’s often less expensive for companies to settle lawsuits than defend against them. One reason is courts in states like Delaware and New Jersey have become unpredictable. Recall how a Delaware judge in 2024 invalidated Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) CEO Elon Musk’s pay package—which shareholders had twice approved—on the dubious rationale that it violated the state’s “fairness” standard. All of this explains why Exxon is joining a parade of companies, including Tesla, Space X, Coinbase (NASDAQ: COIN), and Dillard’s (NYSE: DDS), that have moved their legal homes to Texas. Politicians like Mr. Levine, who oversees New York City’s worker pension funds, worry they’ll have a harder time raiding companies based in Texas. Glass Lewis and ISS, which control 90% of the proxy advisory market, also fear their power over companies will wane if activists face a higher burden to bring ESG resolutions. The duopoly offers consulting services to businesses on how to win shareholder votes, so the firms profit from more ESG proposals. Exxon hasn’t sought to amend its bylaws to limit shareholder resolutions, but it hasn’t ruled out the option. Mr. Levine is urging shareholders to vote against its move because he says it “sets the stage for the potential erosion of shareholder rights under Texas state law.” Huh? Limiting access to the proxy ballot for political activists who don’t have a stake in a company’s long-term success is in the interest of shareholders. Reducing frivolous litigation and payouts to plaintiff attorneys would also benefit shareholders who ultimately pay a company’s legal bills. ISS echoed Mr. Levine’s arguments this week in recommending a vote against the move. “The company has demonstrated a degree of hostility to shareholders’ exercise of certain of these key accountability mechanisms in recent years,” ISS wrote. It’s true Exxon has opposed ESG resolutions. But by describing them euphemistically as “accountability mechanisms,” ISS is showing its left hand. ISS also complained that Exxon’s amended bylaws would provide “an exclusive forum provision” to litigate shareholder complaints in federal court in southern Texas or the state’s special business courts. Glass Lewis said in its benchmark advisory policy that such “forum selection clauses are not in shareholders’ best interests.” But as Exxon replies, a “substantial portion of the S&P 500 including the majority of Delaware incorporated issuers, maintain exclusive-forum provisions designating a single court for internal affairs litigation.” The proxy advisers don’t want Texas courts to be the sole arbiters of shareholder lawsuits because the state’s judges may be less likely to indulge strained liability theories, such as those in the lawsuit against Mr. Musk’s compensation. Glass Lewis and ISS have been trying to rehabilitate their political image amid stepped-up scrutiny from the Securities and Exchange Commission, state Attorneys General and Members of Congress. But their opposition to Exxon’s move underscores their unholy alliance with progressive activists, government pension funds and plaintiff attorneys. Breaking the proxy advisers’ power would require legislation, which needs Democratic support. But don’t be surprised if more companies seek to escape their clutches by moving to Texas.

Read the article

5/13/2026

Shareholder Activism in Asia Surges 23% as Reforms Push Corporate Governance Up the Agenda

BusinessWire (05/13/26)

Shareholder activism in Asia has reached record levels, with activity up by almost 23% in 2025 as investors sharpen their focus on the region to capitalize on emerging opportunities, according to Diligent Market Intelligence’s Corporate Governance in Asia 2026 report. Almost 250 Asia-based companies were publicly subjected to activist demands in 2025, up from 203 in 2024, with momentum sustained into the opening quarter of 2026 as activists engaged more than 100 issuers. Corporate governance issues accounted for almost one-third of activist demands in the first quarter of 2026 and one-quarter of all demands in 2025, reflecting how reforms by governments and regulators have pushed governance up the agenda. Japan remains Asia’s activism hotspot, accounting for 56% of regional activity in 2025 and 32% in Q1 2026, cementing its status as the second-most active shareholder activism market globally, ahead of Europe. Efforts linked to board composition are gaining traction, with activists winning 37 board seats at Japan-based companies in 2025, up from seven in 2024 and 23 in 2023. Dalton Investments and Nippon Active Value Fund jointly rank as Japan’s most prolific activists, engaging a combined total of 40 companies over the three-year period examined. “Having overtaken Europe as the second-most active hub for shareholder activism, Japan now sits at the center of investors’ governance agenda,” said Josh Black, Editor-in-Chief, Diligent Market Intelligence. “The result is a market where activism is embedded at historically high levels and boards are under real pressure to deliver long-term value.” Policy and regulatory reforms in South Korea have given activists new levers to unlock value, with 60 companies facing demands in Q1 2026 alone, already matching the full-year 2025 total. Governance is the dominant theme, accounting for 34% of all demands in Q1 2026, up from 30% in 2025 and 28% in 2024. Align Partners Capital Management and Park Young-Ok (Smart Income) rank as the most prolific activists in Diligent Market Intelligence’s South Korea watchlist, each engaging 12 companies over the period examined. “Historically, South Korea was a challenging market for activism given the high levels of family ownership, but initiatives such as the government's ‘Value-Up Program’ have provided an opening for activists to engage and push for change," said Black. "Retail investors are also having an impact on how the landscape develops.”

Read the article

5/8/2026

This Mini Berkshire Hathaway Is a Buy. Jana Partners Is Pushing to Break It Up.

Barron's (05/08/26) Bary, Andrew

Markel Group (NYSE: MKL) is the best known of the so-called mini Berkshire Hathaways (NYSE: BRK.B) that combine insurance, stock investments, and wholly owned businesses. Like Berkshire, Markel has attracted a dedicated shareholder base in the 40 years since it went public. The stock is up 225-fold to $1,800 from $8 at its 1986 initial public offering—but still behind the 300-fold gain in Berkshire over that span. The company’s CEO, Tom Gayner, 64, is a longtime fan of Berkshire and told an audience in Omaha, Neb., before the Berkshire annual meeting recently that Markel has “studied the playbook.” The stock is worth buying now, closing at $1,800 a share on Thursday. Markel trades for about 1.2 times its March 31 book value of $1,450 per share—below its average of close to 1.4 times in the past few years—and for 13 times projected 2026 operating earnings. The stock also trades way below Markel’s own estimate of its intrinsic value of about $2,900 a share. If the stock rises slightly, Markel’s market cap would be sufficient for the company’s potential inclusion in the S&P 500 index. The company has improving insurance operations, a sizable equity portfolio of $12 billion that gives it more bang from stock market gains than most insurance peers, some appealing noninsurance businesses, and a low valuation relative to specialty insurance peers like W.R. Berkley (NYSE: WRB), RLI (NYSE: RLI), and Kinsale Capital Group (NYSE: KNSL). Markel has attracted an investor, Jana Partners, which took a Markel holding in late 2024 that is now under 1%. It sent a letter to the Markel board in late April after the company’s first-quarter earnings missed expectations and urged the company to sell the noninsurance units and buy back $2 billion of stock, or just under 10% of the current market value of $22.5 billion. “The stock has been as cheap as it has been in the past 10 to 15 years” on a price-to-book basis, says Charlie Frischer, who runs a Seattle family office and owns the shares. Frischer thinks the activist presence will pressure management to become more shareholder-friendly. That already seems to be happening. Gayner said on the company’s earnings conference call in late April that Markel would be accelerating its stock-repurchase program and that buybacks now are Markel’s best form of capital allocation. He said the company would repurchase 10% of its stock in under five years. The other bullish development for Markel is that its core insurance operations are improving under the leadership of Simon Wilson, who took full control of the insurance business in 2025 after heading its successful international operations. The company’s underwriting profit margin rose three percentage points in the first quarter, with the company showing a combined ratio of 93% versus 96% year ago. A combined ratio is expenses and losses as a percentage of insurance premiums—a lower figure is better. Like Berkshire and Fairfax Financial Holdings (OTCMKTS: FRFHF), a Canadian insurer that follows the Berkshire model, Markel is out of favor with investors. All three stocks are behind the S&P 500 over the past year. The recent underperformance at Markel reflects its exposure to the property-and-casualty insurance market, where pricing is weakening after years of strength. It’s also an asset-rich defensive stock in a market favoring technology and growth. If its insurance business weakens again, that could hit Markel’s stock price. Markel didn’t help itself with a disappointing first-quarter profit report in late April that reflected weakness at the noninsurance businesses—a grab bag of about two dozen companies. Markel, following the Berkshire model, took profits from its insurance operations and built a portfolio of unrelated businesses starting 20 years ago. The portfolio, which was known as Markel Ventures until last year, includes Lansing, a building-products distributor; Brahmin, a maker of high-end handbags; and Eagle, a Virginia home builder. This portfolio produced about $850 million of operating profits before taxes in 2025 and could be worth close to $10 billion, or nearly half of Markel’s market value. The company does have $4 billion of debt. In its recent letter to the Markel board, Jana lauded the “dramatic improvement in insurance operations” but argued that what the Markel calls its “unique flywheel” of insurance and Ventures hasn’t worked for shareholders. Jana wrote that “the current structure produces sub-peer shareholder returns, creates no unique value, and warrants a discounted multiple.” In a statement, Jana noted that Markel stock has lagged its peers over the past decade. “While we have appreciated our dialogue with the Board and the steps it has taken to remediate performance in insurance, clearly more is needed,” the firm wrote. Markel is largely a specialty insurer, taking on such risks as professional liability, marine, valuable coastal homes, and even classic cars. These areas are seeing some pricing pressure but not as much as property insurance, where Markel has less exposure than some peers. Well-run specialty insurers like Berkley and RLI trade for 2.5 times book value, double Markel’s valuation. Jana calls the noninsurance businesses a “poison pill” that limits potential strategic interest in Markel that could include overseas insurers eager for a U.S. presence. Gayner tells Barron’s that the board will evaluate the Jana letter, but he didn’t sound enthusiastic about it. “Our diversified and resilient business model and long-term orientation have served our shareholders well for a long period of time and will continue to do so.” Investor and Berkshire board member Chris Davis, whose firm, Davis Advisors, has been a Markel investor since its IPO, doesn’t like the Jana breakup idea. He told CNBC that it’s “one of the stupidest suggestions in the past 20 years.” The Jana presence is a warning to Berkshire that if it doesn’t perform over the next decade, it also could be engaged by investors after Warren Buffett’s death. Markel lacks Berkshire-quality businesses, but it has an improving insurance story, a strong balance sheet, and a market value that is just 2% of Berkshire’s. Its smaller size gives it better growth prospects.

Read the article

5/7/2026

Informal Activist Settlements Gain Ground but Raise Concerns

Governance Intelligence (05/07/26) Bannerman, Natalie

Informal settlements with shareholder activists are gaining traction as companies seek faster and less disruptive ways to resolve activist campaigns, research suggests. Analysis from U.S. law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom suggests these arrangements can offer a practical alternative to formal agreements, particularly where both sides see potential alignment on strategy or governance. Data from the recent proxy season suggests this preference for speed is becoming more pronounced across the U.S. market. In its Proxy Season Review 2025, Diligent Market Intelligence said companies are increasingly wary of the costs and distractions of drawn-out proxy fights and are more willing to settle quickly with activists, often before campaigns become public. ‘The first half of 2025 showed that U.S. activists are not just reacting to market conditions but actively shaping their strategies to capitalize on emerging opportunities,' said Josh Black, editor in chief at Diligent Market Intelligence. 'While many found advantageous settlement terms, others broke with tradition by going the whole way to a vote or pursued withhold campaigns. Notably, the proportion of seats secured through settlements reached a five-year high of 92%, with the average settlement time dropping to 16.5 days in the second quarter, demonstrating the effectiveness of their strategies.' Diligent's analysis also points to a faster cadence for resolving board seat campaigns amid market uncertainty. The average time to settle at U.S.-based companies fell from 19 days in the first quarter of 2025 to 16.5 days in the second quarter, reinforcing the view that both companies and activists are prioritizing quick outcomes over prolonged, public confrontation. Unlike formal settlements, informal arrangements are not restricted by binding contractual provisions such as standstill agreements or voting commitments. Instead, they tend to rely on a mix of public signaling, market expectations and reputational incentives. A company can announce specific governance changes, such as board refreshment or a strategic review, while the activist indicates support by stepping back from escalation, for example by not nominating directors or pursuing a proxy contest. One of the main advantages is efficiency. Informal settlements can be reached more quickly than negotiated legal agreements, which usually require extensive drafting, negotiation and disclosure. This can reduce advisory costs and limit disruption to management and board operations. It may also help avoid long public disputes that can create uncertainty for investors. In some cases, companies may see an informal approach as a way to retain greater control over messaging and timing. However, the lack of enforceability is a key concern. Without contractual obligations, there is no formal way to prevent an activist from restarting a campaign if expectations aren't met. As Skadden's analysis notes, these arrangements depend heavily on trust and credibility. Boards need to assess whether the activist has a history of adhering to informal commitments and whether there is a genuine alignment of interests. Where an activist has a history of escalating campaigns or changing positions, an informal settlement may create more risk than stability. There is also the challenge of ambiguity. Informal settlements are often less clearly defined than formal agreements, which can create differing interpretations of what has been agreed. For example, a company may believe it has addressed key concerns through governance changes, while the activist may view those steps as insufficient or only a starting point. This misalignment can resurface later, potentially under more contentious circumstances. Boards also need to consider how informal settlements will be perceived by other shareholders. Institutional investors increasingly expect transparency and accountability in how companies respond to activist pressure. If an informal arrangement appears to grant a single shareholder greater influence without clear justification, it may raise governance concerns. At the same time, if the outcome reflects broadly supported changes, other investors may view the resolution positively regardless of its form. Preparation remains a key factor in determining whether an informal settlement is viable. Companies that maintain regular engagement with shareholders, conduct ongoing board and strategy evaluations and anticipate potential activist critiques are better positioned to respond constructively. Ultimately, informal settlements are becoming a standard feature of the activism playbook, not a niche alternative and the faster they are reached, the more discipline boards need to apply. When choosing an informal route, directors should insist on clarity around the company's commitments, the activist's expectations and the triggers that would reopen the dispute, and they should pressure-test whether reputational incentives are truly enough to keep both sides aligned. If that clarity and alignment can't be achieved, a more formal agreement may be the more defensible governance outcome.

Read the article

5/6/2026

The Chip Craze Is Turning a Glass Company and a Toilet Maker Into AI Stocks

Wall Street Journal (05/06/26) Mitovich, Jared

Investors’ pursuit of the companies supplying key materials to the artificial intelligence build-out is powering an epic rally in shares of chip makers. Other companies caught in the frenzy include a 175-year-old glass manufacturer, a heavy machinery giant and Japan’s leading maker of toilets. The AI trade has boosted stocks’ record run, with the S&P 500 climbing 1.5% to new highs on Wednesday after signs of progress on a Middle East peace deal and strong earnings from Advanced Micro Devices (NASDAQ: AMD). It has also sparked volatility in markets, sending investors swinging between worries that AI won’t produce the expected blockbuster profits and fears it will disrupt entire industries. Now, many are gravitating around key suppliers of the parts and materials needed to keep AI humming for years to come, confident those companies will profit no matter what. Corning (NYSE: GLW) is among the latest companies to reap a windfall from the ripple effects of the data center build-out. Shares soared 12% on Wednesday after Nvidia (NASDAQ: NVDA) announced plans to invest $500 million in the glassmaker to expand manufacturing of fiber optics, a key connective tissue for AI infrastructure. Fiber-optic cables made by the company, which once manufactured light bulbs for Thomas Edison, have become the preferred connectors for many hyperscalers, a reversal for a product that lost money for two decades. The Nvidia deal comes on the heels of an earlier agreement to sell cable to Meta in a multiyear deal worth up to $6 billion. Caterpillar’s (NYSE: CAT) stock surged after the equipment maker known for its ubiquitous yellow excavators and bulldozers reported higher profit and sales last quarter, boosted by strong demand for large power-generation equipment used in data centers. The company is capitalizing, seeking to more than double its production capacity for turbine engines by 2030, and launching its biggest factory spending in 15 years, including $725 million at its Lafayette, Ind., plant to make more piston-driven engines for generators. “Are they a pick-and-shovel? You can say they very much are in a literal way,” said David Miller, chief investment officer at Catalyst Funds, which has built big positions in companies at the “bottleneck to the build-out” of AI. Toto (TYO: 5332), the Japanese toilet maker famous for its bidet Washlets, also makes ceramics used in semiconductor components and recently reported that sales of its electrostatic chucks more than doubled from a year ago, growing faster than any other business line. Shares have soared 22% in May alone, extending their 2026 climb to more than 50%, a rally that comes even as the Middle East war threatens to lift production costs. In a presentation to investors at the end of April, Toto pledged to make its ceramics line a “core business,” after urging from the U.K.-based Palliser Capital earlier this year. Palliser presented a plan to Toto in February which called the toilet maker the “most undervalued and overlooked AI memory beneficiary.” “There are quite a few sleepy Japanese companies who do one or two things really well… and all of a sudden they’re really in demand,” said Sean Sun, a portfolio manager for Thornburg Investment Management with a focus on international stocks.

Read the article

5/5/2026

Can the Meme Stock King Pull off Audacious eBay Swoop?

Financial Times (05/05/26) Fontanella-Khan, James

Ryan Cohen, the unpredictable king of the meme-stock era, has set his sights on his next project: a huge leveraged buyout. The GameStop (NYSE: GME) chief executive is seeking to engineer a deal in which the shrinking video-game retailer buys online marketplace eBay (NASDAQ: EBAY) for $56 billion in cash and stock. For Cohen, who made billions during the meme stock boom, pulling off the deal looks a tough ask. GameStop’s $11 billion market capitalisation is a fraction of eBay’s and the financing required to get the deal done is far from secure. The gulf between the two companies is not just one of valuation, but also of stability and predictability. But while the unconventional deal may appear a long shot, people who have dealt with GameStop’s boss say it is a “quintessential” Cohen move. “Ryan is a bit of a cowboy, a guy that is hard to deal with, but he’s been pretty successful,” said a person who has done business with him. Cohen made his fortune through the $3.4 billion sale of online pet food retailer Chewy (NYSE: CHWY) — which he co-founded in 2011 — to pet food chain PetSmart in 2017. He bought a 10% stake in GameStop and joined the retailer’s board in 2021. Within six months he was appointed chair with a brief to make a struggling bricks-and-mortar retailer fit for the digital age. Cohen went on to gain notoriety by riding the pandemic-era meme stock wave, in which armies of retail traders sent stocks soaring and plunging on the basis of vibes rather than fundamentals. He recast GameStop as an ecommerce turnaround, hiring senior executives from Amazon to lend credibility and exploiting its surging share price to issue billions in new equity, capitalizing on the exuberance of bedroom traders to strengthen its balance sheet. Cohen is seeking to buy eBay, in which GameStop has already built a 5% stake, and position it as a credible rival to Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN). While the board of eBay has yet to officially comment, people close to the company have expressed serious concerns around the sources of funding as well as the industrial logic of combining with a much smaller company. Eric Talley, professor of law and business at Columbia Law School, said it was unusual for a “small kind of minnow company” to be “trying to eat the whale." The lack of obvious synergies between companies that do not operate in the same industry made the deal “a bit of a head scratcher from a textbook perspective”, he added. Ebay remains one of the largest global online marketplaces, but it has long been seen as a laggard in innovation compared with Amazon and newer ecommerce platforms such as Vinted. GameStop, for its part, has struggled to define a post-meme craze identity. Combining the two companies could, Cohen’s logic goes, create a platform with both scale and a revitalised retail investor base. The maths behind the deal sets up a steep challenge for GameStop. Cohen has access to almost $40 billion of funding — comprised of a $20 billion financing commitment from TD Bank, roughly $9 billion cash on GameStop’s balance sheet and $10.7 billion worth of GameStop stock. That leaves a financing gap of roughly $16 billion to be filled, most likely through additional stock issuance. In normal circumstances that kind of gap would be prohibitive — but GameStop is not a normal stock. Its investor base has in the past shown a willingness to support management through highly unconventional capital raises. “I can kind of see the investment thesis, but it involves such a huge upfront financial commitment from GameStop that you have to assume there’s a degree of reliance on meme stock boosts,” said Ann Lipton, a law professor at the University of Colorado. “So far, those don’t seem to be materializing. So I’m skeptical they can pull it off,” she added. Michael Burry, the “Big Short” investor who gained notoriety from his bet against the U.S. housing market ahead of the 2008 financial crisis, had until recently been one of Cohen’s more prominent supporters. But that position has abruptly changed. On Monday Burry said he was likely to sell his stake in GameStop partly as a response to Cohen’s decision to go all in on eBay, a deal he perceives as too big and loaded with risk. “If GameStop wants to do it with billions of interest expense and all manner of covenants restricting its movements, it will not be breaking new ground,” he said on his blog. “It will be trotting in well-worn ruts on the road to capitalist hell.” Cohen had a chance to make his pitch to investors on Monday during an interview on CNBC, but he ended up sparring with the hosts while offering little detail on financing. His performance immediately became a meme. Cohen’s supporters took to social media to accuse the mainstream media of a “hit job." But while the odds may look stacked against him, the person who has worked closely with Cohen cautioned that it would be a mistake to bet against a cowboy investor with “nothing to lose”.

Read the article

4/30/2026

Lululemon’s New CEO Is Already in the Hot Seat—and She Hasn’t Even Started

Wall Street Journal (04/30/26) Thomas, Lauren; Kapner, Suzanne

Lululemon’s (NASDAQ: LULU) board members were under pressure. The company’s estranged founder had launched a proxy fight, with Elliott Investment Management waiting in the wings, and the board was being pushed to quickly recruit a new chief executive who could turn things around. When Lululemon landed on former Nike (NYSE: NKE) executive Heidi O’Neill for the job last week, Chairwoman Marti Morfitt and the board thought they had it in the bag. But the pick backfired spectacularly. Lululemon shares tanked, falling 13% the day of the announcement, and they have declined further since. Wall Street analysts critiqued her tenure at Nike, and investors complained that she wouldn’t be starting the new job for more than four months, leaving the struggling company without a permanent leader at a vulnerable time. Lululemon said in a statement that O’Neill has the full support of the board, which remains confident that her proven track record and operational expertise make her the right choice to lead the company. Days after naming O’Neill to the CEO job, Lululemon announced a new board member: former senior Unilever (NYSE: UL) executive Esi Eggleston Bracey. She will replace Colgate-Palmolive (NYSE: CL) Chief Operating Officer Shane Grant, who had been a target of Lululemon founder Chip Wilson. That announcement was seen by some as a way to try to contain some of the damage, but it made some investors—including Wilson—more furious. He has since said that the company replaced one “bean counter” with another. The addition of Bracey to the board was unrelated to the CEO announcement, according to a person familiar with the situation. Lululemon has been wading through turmoil for over a year, facing the public attack from Wilson and additional scrutiny from Elliott Investment Management. Wilson has been agitating for a board overhaul, and The Wall Street Journal has reported that Elliott was looking to help the retailer find a new leader. Both believe the business is challenged and the brand mismanaged, with sales in North America declining. The last CEO, Calvin McDonald, departed in January. O’Neill carries the weight of a Nike resume, but also some baggage. The longtime Nike employee worked there for over 25 years, most recently as president of consumer, product and brand. Under her watch, Nike doubled down on its direct-to-consumer approach, cutting out partnerships with retailers such as Macy’s (NYSE: M) and DSW, a move largely seen by former executives and investors as the main reason for Nike’s current struggles. Nike is still undoing much of the fallout from its direct-to-consumer push. After O’Neill’s departure, Nike split up her role into three separate positions. In announcing O’Neill’s appointment, Lululemon highlighted how much global scale she helped achieve at Nike. That didn’t sit right with some analysts, who have countered that fixing the U.S. business should take priority over global growth. “This is not a tuneup. It is a turnaround,” said Bill Campbell, director of research at Paragon Intel, a management research and analysis company. “The mandate is to fix North America, restore full-price discipline, reignite product newness, and put energy back into the brand. O’Neill may help stabilize the business, but she does not look like the obvious architect of the deeper reset this moment demands.” Other analysts are more upbeat. “She brings a significant breadth of knowledge in women’s performance apparel and her experience accelerating speed-to-market is particularly welcome at Lululemon where lead times have ballooned to about 24 months,” said William Blair analyst Sharon Zackfia. Analysts and investors will have to wait several months to see what O’Neill brings to the table. She has a noncompete agreement with Nike that means she can’t start the job until Sept. 8. In the meantime, the company is being run by interim co-CEOs Meghan Frank, who is the finance chief, and André Maestrini, the chief commercial officer. In March, Frank told investors that the company was working on fixing its U.S. business. “A top priority for the management team is returning to full-price sales growth in North America,” she said, explaining that the company was adding more new products and rebalancing its inventory to reinforce its premium positioning. A Lululemon investor said they’ve been disappointed that the company hasn’t made any major changes under the co-CEOs, and aren’t expecting any to come until O’Neill is able to take over and get her arms around the business. Wilson, in a letter to shareholders Wednesday, pointed out that the company would be without a permanent CEO for nearly 300 days, a decision that he said “escapes logic.” He said he hoped that O’Neill would be the right person for the job, but added that her long tenure at Nike “is not the symbol of transformative, creative-first leadership.” Wilson and O’Neill have exchanged messages since the news of her appointment, according to people familiar with the matter. Some big investors were pressuring Morfitt, who helped run the search for the next CEO, to move quickly. They felt the board wasn’t grasping the urgency of the company’s problems and the need to move fast to turn the business around. Executive search firm Korn Ferry conducted the CEO search for Lululemon. Other candidates under consideration in addition to O’Neill included Jane Nielsen, the former chief financial officer of Ralph Lauren (NYSE: RL), whom Elliott Investment Management had been pushing for the role. Elliott took a stake worth over $1 billion in the company as it tried to help facilitate a turnaround after McDonald’s (NYSE: MCD) abrupt departure, the Journal reported in December. Nielsen underwent an extensive interview process for the CEO job that lasted a few months, people familiar with the matter said. Nielsen had also been in discussions with Wilson about potentially joining his board slate, before she joined Elliott’s campaign to be CEO, according to people familiar with the matter. Other names circulating included Arc’teryx Equipment CEO Stuart Haselden. He had previously spent five years at Lululemon in roles ranging from finance chief to chief operating officer before leaving in 2020. Another name floated was Abercrombie & Fitch (NYSE: ANF) CEO Fran Horowitz. But it would have been too costly to buy her out of her existing contract with the apparel retailer, some of the people said. Neither Haselden nor Horowitz ultimately interviewed for the position, according to people familiar with the search. The Lululemon investor said that some shareholders were worried that a Lululemon insider was going to be tapped for the job, so O’Neill’s appointment was seen as a positive. But there also might have been some overly wishful thinking that someone with a bigger profile on Wall Street and more turnaround chops would end up as the next CEO, resulting in disappointment with O’Neill, the investor said. O’Neill’s appointment comes as Lululemon is engaged in a nasty proxy fight with Wilson, who has nominated a slate of three directors and argues that the company needs to refocus on its core values of creating innovative, premium activewear inspired by its muse—the Super Girl, a young, educated, working woman who is a trendsetter. Wilson and Lululemon have attempted to settle their differences privately and prevent their very public fight over board seats from going all the way to a shareholder vote. He and his financial advisers offered a three-year standstill deal in exchange for his three board seats, Wilson said in his letter to shareholders. Wilson’s three board nominees were also interviewed by Lululemon as it considered them for seats, the company said in a proxy filing this week. The company has argued that Wilson kept moving the goal posts on the terms of a potential settlement. Wilson says the board was seeking to have him put millions of dollars into an escrow account to cover a “hypothetical, potential future breach of the nondisparagement” clause. Lululemon hasn’t yet announced a date for its annual meeting. But a resolution seemed to move further away after O’Neill was named to the top job. Wilson is turning the heat back up. “All the roads of Lululemon’s value destruction lead back to one place: the Boardroom,” he wrote to shareholders. “This all comes back to the Board’s inability to understand the core drivers of the brand’s premium positioning and success.” When the company named O’Neill as its next CEO, Morfitt highlighted her vision and her three decades of experience in the retail sector. “We were thrilled by [the] candidates we saw,” Morfitt told the Journal in an interview the day the news was announced. She described the candidates as “very high caliber” and said “many of them said they would not make a move except for this one.” O’Neill stood out as “the clear choice to serve as the company’s next leader,” she said.

Read the article

4/29/2026

How Toilet Maker Toto Turned its Ceramics Know-How Into an AI Play

Nikkei Asia (04/29/26)

Japan's Toto (TYO: 5332) may be best known for churning out toilets, bathtubs and kitchens, but its earnings are now anchored by a very different kind of product: high-precision ceramic components used in the kind of semiconductor manufacturing equipment crucial to sustaining the artificial intelligence boom. After five decades of slow burn, this advanced ceramics business is set to generate well over half the group's operating profit in the fiscal year that ended in March, eclipsing its storied Japanese home equipment division for the first time. But British fund Palliser Capital says Toto needs to push its high-tech ceramics unit further into the spotlight, urging improvements in transparency and strategy. In a February letter, it called on management to "improve disclosure" on the division "to provide transparency on its competitive strength and growth outlook, ensuring its true value is appropriately reflected" in the company's share price. The London-based fund, which has accumulated a stake in Toto, has a track record of pushing for governance shifts at Japanese companies, including Keisei Electric Railway (TYO: 9009) and Japan Post (TYO: 6178). It also argues that Toto's investment into the fast-growing ceramics business is too modest. If Toto improves its disclosure and allocates more capital to its ceramics unit, the fund estimates that could push up the company's share price by as much as 55% -- from roughly 6,000 yen ($37.56) at the time of the letter to nearly 9,000 yen, far above the previous peak of 7,380 yen, hit in 2021. Toto's share price closed at 5,425 yen on Tuesday, ahead of its earnings announcement on April 30. Toto expects operating profit from the advanced ceramic division to jump 32% to a record 27 billion yen ($169 million) in the fiscal year ended March 2026. The segment is set to outperform the company's Japanese housing equipment business again, which is projected to earn 18 billion yen, and its overseas housing equipment unit at 7 billion yen -- giving ceramics a commanding 55% share of total operating profit. With the AI boom driving strong demand for semiconductor-related materials, expectations for further growth are rising. As more Japanese manufactures, such as Hitachi and Fujitsu, have boosted profitability by reshaping their business portfolios in recent years, investors are increasingly looking for Toto to follow a similar trajectory. Toto's ceramic research began in the 1970s, as Japan's postwar period of rapid growth tapered off and waves of home construction completed. "We wanted to use our ceramic expertise to create high-value products," said Junji Kameshima, manager of Toto's ceramics business planning department. The ceramics division was formally established in 1984. Its portfolio eventually crystallized around three core products for chipmaking equipment. First, electrostatic chucks, or e-chucks, for etching tools that form circuits on silicon wafers used in NAND flash memory for long-term storage. These devices electrostatically clamp the wafer to the chuck. Second, aerosol deposition components that protect chamber walls in etching equipment for logic semiconductors. Third, highly durable structural parts used in manufacturing equipment for large LCD panels. All draw on process technologies honed through decades of manufacturing toilets and other so-called sanitary ware. Early production was handcrafted and low-yield. But the 2020 launch of a highly automated plant in Nakatsu, in southern Japan's Oita prefecture, coupled with AI systems trained to detect tiny signs of defects, transformed output. Yield -- or the percentage of non-defective items produced -- jumped to over 90% from 50%-60% previously, while lead times shrank from roughly 180 days to just over 40. The segment's operating margin is now projected to exceed 40% for the fiscal year ended March, compared with barely 9% five years ago. Of Toto's 175 billion yen in strategic spending planned in the three years through March 2027, only 29 billion yen is earmarked for ceramics, the smallest allocation among the items listed. Global manufacturing optimization and other international operations account for 72 billion yen, IT initiatives for 42 billion, and domestic operations for 32 billion yen. While semiconductors are prone to the industry's well-known "silicon cycle," or the periodic swings between boom and bust, Ryosuke Hayashi, Toto's chief technology officer, does not foresee a drop in NAND-related capital expenditure anytime soon. "I don't expect a major pullback. We may not see the bust in 2027," he said. SEMI, the international semiconductor industry association, also forecasts that revenue in the global chip manufacturing equipment sector will grow 9% in 2026 from 2025, followed by an 8% increase in 2027 from 2026. Electrostatic chucks should benefit both from new demand and from replacement needs as existing units wear down. The bigger question is how aggressively Toto will invest from here -- both to capture replacement demand and to win new customers. One promising frontier is chiplet integration, a technology that boosts performance by combining multiple chips. Toto believes its structural parts are well-suited for chiplet-fixture materials, Hayashi said, and development work "is already underway." The ceramics business also complements Toto's housing equipment operations. At its research site in Kanagawa prefecture, the company has installed cutting-edge analytical tools originally required for semiconductor development; these now support both businesses. "Ceramics grew thanks to earnings from Japanese housing equipment," Kameshima told Nikkei, adding "the restructuring in our Chinese housing equipment business was possible because ceramics succeeded." Still, investor understanding has lagged. As recently as five years ago, Hayashi recalled investors asking, "Can any of this [ceramics technology] be used in a kitchen?" "Sanitary ware and semiconductors are worlds apart," said Sachiko Okada, an analyst at Goldman Sachs Japan. "Many investors still have no idea what Toto is capable of. They don't grasp Toto's strengths."

Read the article

4/28/2026

Ingles Markets’ Real Estate Grabs Attention in Proxy Fight

Grocery Dive (04/28/26) Silverstein, Sam

As Ingles Markets (NASDAQ: IMKTA) braces for shareholders to vote this week on whether to elect a change-minded outside investor nominated by a vocal investment firm to its board of directors, the chain’s real estate strategy has emerged as a key flash point. Summer Road, the investment firm that is trying to persuade investors to vote for that nominee, Rory Held, during Ingles’ annual meeting on Thursday, contends that Ingles has allowed hundreds of acres of land to sit “fallow and in disrepair, dragging down corporate returns and failing the communities Ingles serves.” Summer Road says it is the beneficial owner of about 3% of the outstanding shares of Ingles’ Class A common stock. The investment firm added in a proxy statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission that it believes Ingles has underperformed compared with other grocery store operators, in part because it has not effectively used the land it owns. “The Company has allocated significant resources to acquiring land and buildings – often former competitor sites – that appear to sit idle or earn no meaningful economic return for shareholders,” Summer Road said. In a statement Summer Road provided to Grocery Dive, Held said he is concerned that Ingles has not developed land it owns into new stores or shopping centers or “put to other productive uses.” “Ultimately, the company’s inaction has resulted in stranded costs and significant lost economic opportunity for shareholders and for the communities in which it operates,” Held said in the statement. Ingles said the investment firm has vastly overstated the grocer’s real estate holdings, adding that undeveloped land “is strategically important to our long-term growth.” Summer Road’s claims illustrate that it has a “total lack of understanding of Ingles’ real estate holdings,” Ingles said. Ingles also argues that the company's properties — which include the land that 174 of its 194 supermarkets sit on — enable it to remain agile by giving it the “flexibility to expand and rearrange store offerings to address evolving customer preferences.” In addition, the grocer also says that owning land strengthens its balance sheet, adding that it has received more than $30 million in gross rent from its tenants. “For grocers broadly, owned real estate is one of the most important drivers of long-term value. For Ingles in particular, strategic ownership of assets provides competitive value creation advantages, including operational control and growth opportunities,” Ingles said in a presentation aimed at dissuading shareholders from voting for Held. If elected to Ingles’ eight-member board, Held will push the company to investigate dividing the retailer’s real estate and grocery operations into two separate companies, according to an April 1 statement from Summer Road. “This separation would likely result in a material re-rating of the Company’s valuation, optimize the capital structure of both entities and potentially catalyze strategic interest from larger grocers,” Summer Road said. Separating the company as Summer Road has suggested would amount to a sale-leaseback strategy that “would be value destructive to Ingles,” according to the grocer. “Charging rent to every store would wipe away profitability and compensation that our valued employees benefit from,” Ingles said. A spokesperson for Ingles said the company did not wish to comment and pointed to the grocer’s published statements about Held's nomination. The dispute over Ingles' approach to managing its real estate points to a fundamental issue retailers routinely grapple with as they decide how to deploy resources, said David Halliday, associate teaching professor of strategic management and public policy at the George Washington University School of Business. For retailers, deciding whether to own or lease land for their facilities includes examining how they want to deploy capital, because investing money into land means those funds are unavailable for other uses that might deliver a higher rate of return, Halliday said. Part of making that choice for a given store involves assessing the risk that the retailer might not be able to renew its lease, which could be problematic if developing the facility requires costly work. Another factor retailers have to consider is that grocers’ stores tend to be attractive tenants for real estate investment trusts, which own many of the nation’s shopping centers, Halliday said. “There is a very massive, very deep pool of capital available for reasonable projects and grocery stores are one of the most sought-after REIT investments, especially considering that the real estate developers can get a 20-year leaseback once they build the property,” Halliday said. “Their goal isn’t to take advantage of the grocery stores. Their goal is to build a market-rate, high-quality asset that returns a solid future investment,” Halliday said. Ingles is not alone among publicly traded grocers in owning a high percentage of the properties its stores occupy, although food retailers that fall into that category tend to be national chains. Walmart (NASDAQ: WMT), for example, owned more than 3,700 of the over 4,600 stores it runs in the United States as of Jan. 31, while Costco (NASDAQ: COST) owned the land and buildings that are home to 512 of the 629 membership warehouses it operated in the United States and Puerto Rico as of Aug. 31, 2025. By contrast, Kroger (NYSE: KR) owned just over half of the facilities that are home to its nearly 2,700 supermarkets as of Jan. 31, although some of those sit on land the company leases. Meanwhile, about 40% of Albertsons’ (NYSE: ACI) 2,244 stores were in facilities the company owns or leases as of Feb. 28. Weis Markets (NYSE: WMK) owned 108 of the 202 grocery stores it operated as of Dec, 27, 2025. Ingles has also asserted that Held’s role as chief investment officer of Summer Road would pose a risk to the company and its shareholders because the investment firm manages money that belongs to the Sackler family, which formerly controlled opioid medicine maker Purdue Pharma. That company was forced into bankruptcy in connection with its links to the opioid crisis. The grocer has urged shareholders to vote for its two nominees to the board: Dwight Jacobs, a former Duke Energy (NYSE: DUK) senior executive, and Rebekah Lowe, a former regional bank president.

Read the article

4/24/2026

Opinion: Lululemon’s CEO Choice Is a Missed Chance to Pacify Elliott

Bloomberg (04/24/26) Felsted, Andrea

Bloomberg Opinion columnist Andrea Felsted writes that Lululemon Athletica Inc. (NASDAQ: LULU) has named former Nike Inc. (NYSE: NKE) executive Heidi O’Neill as its new chief executive officer, replacing Calvin McDonald who stepped down in December. The surprise appointment risks pleasing no one: Neither two powerful shareholders, nor other investors who sent the stock down to a six-year low on Thursday. Elliott Investment Management LP, which took a $1 billion stake in the yoga pants maker in December, had been working with former Ralph Lauren Corp. (NYSE: RL) Chief Operating Officer Jane Nielsen as its preferred CEO candidate. Meanwhile, Lululemon founder Chip Wilson, who no longer has a formal role with the company but remains a significant shareholder, had called for the board to be refreshed before the next CEO was chosen. At least Lululemon now has a leader from outside of the company who can roll up their sleeves and tackle its considerable challenges, although unhelpfully she won’t start until September. The company faces several headwinds, including intense competition from nimble upstarts such as Alo Yoga and SoftBank Group Corp. (SFTBY)-backed Vuori, fashion tastes moving to smart from slouchy and a fresh see-through leggings fiasco after its new “Get Low” workout pants stretched too thin when wearers performed squats. O’Neill is a seasoned executive with decades of experience in the athletic-wear business. She spent 26 years at Nike, and was considered to be a candidate to replace former CEO John Donahoe, according to Bloomberg News. So she stands a good chance of getting to grips with Lululemon’s many issues. But Nike is also struggling with problems that aren’t a million miles from Lululemon’s: powerful challengers in the running-shoes category, Adidas AG’s dominance of more fashion-forward ranges and a brand that just doesn’t seem to be doing it anymore. Shares in Lululemon fell as much as 13% on Thursday. It’s hard to see why the company didn’t choose Nielsen. She had a strong track record at Ralph Lauren, where with CEO Patrice Louvet she helped polish the brand’s image and halted its habit of discounting. Nielsen would have been able to tackle the nuts and bolts of retailing, such as controlling costs, trimming the store estate and matching demand from shoppers with the supply of leggings, sports bras and other basics, thereby fattening margins. Part of Ralph Lauren’s success has been concentrating on its “hero” products such as sweaters and blazers. This strategy could have been applied at Lululemon by jettisoning lines such as the tie-up with the National Football League and focusing on the yoga pants that made it famous. Nielsen is already well known to investors and analysts, too. Appointing Nielsen wouldn’t have waved a magic wand. Part of the reason Lululemon has been struggling in North America is stale products; that wasn’t part of her portfolio at Ralph Lauren. But she would likely have been able to bring in the right team. It’s not clear that O’Neill has sufficient product expertise either. Her final role at Nike, between June 2023 and September 2025, was leading its consumer, product and brand operations, where she helped launch the partnership with Kim Kardashian’s shapewear line Skims. She was also head of Nike’s women’s business between 2007 and 2014. But in between, she ran Nike’s own stores and website. This side of the business is being de-emphasized by a new CEO after Donahoe moved too far away from selling its sneakers and hoodies through third-party retailers, giving shelf-space to rivals. Elliott has little choice now other than to support O’Neill. But the investor — as well as other shareholders — may always be comparing her performance against what Nielsen might have achieved; Ralph Lauren’s shares have risen almost 200% over the past five years or so, while Nike’s have fallen 65% over the same period and are close to a nine-year low. The Lululemon board could have used the CEO appointment to get Elliott onside for a compelling turnaround plan. Choosing O’Neill looks like a missed opportunity to build bridges with one of the company’s detractors. The other critic is Wilson, who still owns 8.6% of the company and has called for a shake-up of Lululemon’s board. He’s proposed three candidates: Marc Maurer, the former co-CEO of sportswear apparel maker On Holding AG (NYSE: ONON), Laura Gentile, the former chief marketing officer of broadcaster ESPN Sports Media Ltd., and Eric Hirshberg, the former CEO of Activision, part of Microsoft Corp.’s (NASDAQ: MSFT) games maker Activision Blizzard Inc. (NASDAQ: ATVI). While Lululemon last month named former Levi Strauss & Co (NYSE: LEVI) CEO Chip Bergh to its board — a step in the right direction — Wilson wants more extensive change, and is unlikely to give up his fight, creating a further distraction for the new CEO. Whoever was hired to lead Lululemon already faced a monumental task. The messy backdrop to O’Neill’s appointment has made it as difficult as doing a grueling workout in a pair of too-flimsy leggings.

Read the article