The Shareholder Forum

supporting investor interests in the use of their capital to produce goods and services


Purpose & History of Services

The Shareholder Forum

The Shareholder Forum supports investor interests in corporate enterprise value with services that require independence – and that may benefit from the Forum’s network resources and recognition for advocacy of long term investor interests – to assure a definition of relevant issues and fair access to information that can be relied upon by both corporate and investor decision-makers.

The policies that provide a foundation for the Forum’s marketplace functions have been carefully developed and tested to allow any investor to participate in its communications, either anonymously or visibly, without acting in concert. Established originally to accommodate professional fund managers, this independent moderator function has proved to be consistently effective in managing orderly processes of issue definition for rational analysis by fiduciaries who are responsible for informed decisions.

Initiated in 1999 by the CFA Society of New York (at the time known as the New York Society of Security Analysts) with lead investor and former corporate investment banker Gary Lutin as guest chairman to address the professional interests of its members, and independently supported by Mr. Lutin since 2001, Forum programs have achieved wide recognition for their effective definition of important issues and orderly exchange of the information and views needed to resolve them. The Forum's ability to convene all key decision-making constituencies and influence leaders has been applied to subjects ranging from corporate control contests to the establishment of consensus marketplace standards for fair disclosure, and has been relied upon by virtually every major U.S. fund manager and the many other investors who have participated in programs that addressed their interests.

Currently important applications of the Forum’s independent position include the support of corporate managers who wish to provide the leadership expected of them by responding to activist challenges with orderly reviews of issues relevant to long term investor interests.

Requests for Shareholder Forum consideration of support may be initiated confidentially by any investor or by the subject company, or by the professional advisors to either.  


Special Program


Independent Analysis of Shareholder Interests

in a merger transaction proposed by

Providian Financial Corporation



Program Index



Independent Analysis of Proxy Governance, Inc.




PROXY Governance, Inc., a new subsidiary of FOLIOfn offering independent proxy advisory services to investors, published a report dated August 18, 2005 and granted permission for its use in this Forum program.  The summary and conclusion sections are copied below, and the full report can be downloaded from this link:


PROXY Governance, INC.

Contact: Alesandra Monaco

Published: 08/18/2005




Special Meeting

Date: 08/31/200Record Date: 08/01/2005





[page 9]


We note with some concern, the market’s reaction to the merger announcement as Providian shares declined that week, the somewhat mixed analyst reactions to the offer price, and Putnam’s opposition to the deal on the grounds that the offer price is insufficient. We are also concerned that – based on the background notes to the merger and the June 6 conference call – the level of transparency with regard to management and the board’s decision-making process is unacceptably low. While we recognize that such documentation does not necessarily offer comprehensive insight into the decision-making and negotiation process, its absence, especially when combined with the above developments, does raise legitimate questions over the extent to which Providian’s board in fact “did its homework” with regard to potential opportunities and whether shareholders are being offered an appropriate premium. Similarly, while Providian engaged two very well-known financial advisors for the transaction, we note that these advisors collaborated in performing each of their financial analyses, and we are always somewhat uncomfortable when the “fairness” opinions are rendered by entities which have a significant financial stake in the completion of the transaction.

On balance, however, we believe that the offer price probably does represent a minimally acceptable acquisition premium. We recognize that there has been longstanding speculation over Providian as a potential takeover target and that to some extent, an acquisition premium was already built into the company’s stock price. We also note that since a significant portion of Providian’s business stems from the sub-prime market, it would be inappropriate to compare premiums with other credit card companies that have stronger credit and customer portfolios; despite the strength of Providian’s turnaround story, it remains a higher risk prospect. As such, we believe that WaMu’s stronger credit quality will help to improve Providian’s funding costs and enable the company to grow, given the broader marketing platform and other resources. The move into the credit card industry, in turn, will help WaMu to diversify its revenue and customer base. As noted above, Providian shareholders will own approximately 13.5% of the combined company and will have (should they choose to remain shareholders) a continuing stake in its financial success. However, as indicated by Providian’s financial advisors, we note that it is unclear the extent to which WaMu’s provisions for the losses stemming from loan and lease portfolios and for impairment of mortgage servicing rights and related risk management strategies are sufficient. Based on various press reports, we believe that it is possible that one reason for WaMu’s being perceived as a possible acquisition target up until the proposed merger with Providian, was likely because, given the rapidly consolidating industry trend, the markets perceived that WaMu did not have sufficient market presence to play as competitive a role in its existing businesses in the future as it has in the past. It is not clear that WaMu with Providian will continue to be an attractive takeover target, which could affect its share price in the longer term.


On balance, PROXY Governance supports this merger proposal because we believe that Providian shareholders will in the long run and in view of the competitive landscape, be better off as shareholders of a financially stronger and more diversified company. The complementary nature of the two companies’ businesses and customer bases – and more importantly, WaMu’s stronger credit position – will provide Providian with a stronger platform for competing in the U.S. credit card industry. However, as previously discussed, we have some substantial reservations with regard to the decision-making process, as well as lingering questions which we feel have been inadequately addressed regarding whether shareholders may have been able to receive a better deal.


© 2005 by PROXY Governance, Inc.™ All Rights Reserved. The information contained in this proxy analysis is confidential, for internal use only in accordance with the terms of the subscriber’s subscription agreement, and may not be reproduced or redistributed in any manner without prior written consent from PROXY Governance, Inc. All information is provided “as is” and without any warranty, is not intended to solicit votes, and should not be relied on for investment or other purposes.




Inquiries, requests to be included in email distribution lists, and suggestions of new Forum subjects may be addressed to

Publicly open programs of the Shareholder Forum are conducted for free participation of all shareholders of a subject company and any fiduciaries or professionals concerned with their decisions, according to the Forum’s stated "Conditions of Participation." In all cases, each participant is expected to make independent use of information obtained through the Forum, and participation is considered private unless the party specifically authorizes identification.

The information provided to Forum participants is intended for their private reference, and permission has not been granted for the republishing of any copyrighted material. The material presented on this web site is the responsibility of Gary Lutin, as chairman of the Shareholder Forum.

Shareholder Forum™ is a trademark owned by The Shareholder Forum, Inc., for the programs conducted since 1999 to support investor access to decision-making information. It should be noted that we have no responsibility for the services that Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc., introduced for review in the Forum's 2010 "E-Meetings" program and has since been offering with the “Shareholder Forum” name, and we have asked Broadridge to use a different name that does not suggest our support or endorsement.