Misleading Reports of Appraisal Rights Suitability for Funds
Easily confirmed viability
Timing expectations
The legal officer of a major fund manager told me this week that they
had decided to abandon their plans to seek appraisal rights on a very
significant holding of Dell stock because someone who seemed to be
associated with the Dell Valuation Trust claimed that its securities
lawyers had said the required liquidity could not be established. He
was misinformed.
Similar confusion has been reported by other fund managers.
Easily confirmed viability
Liquidity can in fact be established, and any lawyer familiar with
securities regulation should be able to assure you of this. The plan
that has been developed for the Dell situation – with law firms
respected for their expertise in the relevant aspects of both
securities regulation and appraisal rights, it should be noted –
simply follows the conventional model used for a wide range of
publicly traded asset-backed investments:
(a)
The Dell Valuation Trust has been
established as an independent entity to (i) manage the administration
of appraisal rights for multiple participants and (ii) provide
reliable reporting to decision-makers.
This is the same function that is provided by servicing agents for
everything from mortgage funds to commodity pools. It is not novel,
and adaptations to particular asset requirements are routine.
(b)
An unaffiliated fund is expected
to offer all holders of Trust-managed appraisal rights the opportunity
to sell or exchange their interests for the fund’s properly registered
public securities.
This, too, is a routine practice.
If you do not have immediate access to a securities lawyer to answer
any questions you may have about this, I will be pleased to arrange a
conference call with appropriate experts.
Timing expectations
A valid concern for fund managers who require liquidity or market
pricing is the time that may be required to complete a registration
process for public trading. This could take as much as four or even
six months, possibly leaving two or three months after the “60 day
option” period during which pricing would be defined only by private
trading. But since the Trust’s independent management of the appraisal
rights should support a reasonably efficient private market, nobody so
far has considered it worthwhile to initiate a registration process
prior to the proposed buyout’s official approval at the special
meeting, which is now scheduled to take place two weeks from now on
September 12.
These are our assumptions for the current plan’s liquidity phases:
|
Duration |
Pricing Reference |
Phase I
From vote until 60 days after the effective date of merger |
Expectations of timing generally in 3 to 5 month range, but
could be anything from 2 to 6 months; effective date of merger
depends on regulatory approvals |
If market trading does not
provide satisfactory references, pricing can be based on the
$13.75 offer price that remains available until the end of the
“60 day option” period |
Phase II
From the end of Phase I until the start of Phase III |
Allow for 1 to 3 months between end of Phase I and completion of
registration to start Phase III, but could be from 0 to 4
months |
Some market pricing based on private trading, but no assurance
of “Level 1” standards |
Phase III
Starting upon completion of registration and public trading |
Allow 4 to 6 months from voting date for completion of
registration process, though could be less |
Public trading at “Level 1” standards |
Questions about this, and especially about the “Phase II” period of
reliance on private market trading, will be welcomed.
We also need to know as soon as
possible about any other questions concerning our plans to support
investor interests. The Forum has devoted considerable attention to
understanding and accommodating a wide range of objectives for the
practical use of appraisal rights since the need for liquidity was
addressed in a 2005 program,
but there will always be new questions and adaptation opportunities.
You should assume, as I do, that any issue you raise will fall into
one of two possible categories: understandings that need to be
clarified or plans that need to be further refined. And for Dell
investors, both need to be addressed now, before the September 12
vote.
GL – August 29, 2013
Gary Lutin
Chairman, The Shareholder Forum
575 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10022
Tel: 212-605-0335
Email:
gl@shareholderforum.com
|