Subscribe Subscribe   Find us on Twitter Follow POL on Twitter  



New Proxy Monitor Report/Lucian Bebchuk Responds to Wachtell Lipton on Hedge Fund Activism.

| No Comments

The Manhattan Institute's Center for Legal Policy released its third annual survey of shareholder proposals at Fortune 250 companies today. This report draws on the Proxy Monitor database to examine shareholder activism in which investors attempt to influence corporate management through the shareholder voting process. The report suggests that the shareholder-proposal process is dominated by a small subset of investors, particularly labor-affiliated pension funds, whose interest may be adverse to the typical shareholder's.

The report discusses several key trends in the 2013 proxy season, including:

• The number of shareholder proposals introduced has increased, but support for these proposals has declined.
• Just 1 percent of shareholder proposals were sponsored by institutional investors unaffiliated with organized labor or a social, religious, or public-policy purpose.
• Labor-affiliated shareholder activism appears to target companies that are more politically active, especially those more supportive of Republicans.
• Shareholder proposals related to corporations' political spending or lobbying were the most common type of proposal but attracted little support.

The full report is available for download here.

In related news, Lucian Bebchuk co-authored a response to Wachtell Lipton's strong criticism of his recent empirical study on the long-term effects of hedge fund activism. The Wachtell, Lipton memos, co-authored by Martin Lipton and several other senior lawyers in the firm, are available here and here. Professor Bebchuk's post is also available on the Harvard Law School Forum here and as a PDF here.

Leave a comment

Once submitted, the comment will first be reviewed by our editors and is not guaranteed to be published. Point of Law editors reserve the right to edit, delete, move, or mark as spam any and all comments. They also have the right to block access to any one or group from commenting or from the entire blog. A comment which does not add to the conversation, runs of on an inappropriate tangent, or kills the conversation may be edited, moved, or deleted.

The views and opinions of those providing comments are those of the author of the comment alone, and even if allowed onto the site do not reflect the opinions of Point of Law bloggers or the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research or any employee thereof. Comments submitted to Point of Law are the sole responsibility of their authors, and the author will take full responsibility for the comment, including any asserted liability for defamation or any other cause of action, and neither the Manhattan Institute nor its insurance carriers will assume responsibility for the comment merely because the Institute has provided the forum for its posting.

Related Entries:



Rafael Mangual
Project Manager,
Legal Policy

Manhattan Institute


Published by the Manhattan Institute

The Manhattan Insitute's Center for Legal Policy.