September
22nd, 2010
James McRitchie
Steven Towns, writing
for Seeking Alpha (Questioning
Symantec’s ‘Virtual’ Shareholder Meetings, 9/20/2010) joined CII,
CalSTRS, CalPERS, USPX and others in objecting to an all virtual meeting
held buy Symantec. This follows up on Ted Allen’s September 16, 2010
article for RiskMetrics,
Investors Object to Symantec’s Virtual Annual Meeting, my
post of September 7, 2010 (also on
Shareowners.org) and USPX’s page of
resources on the issue with copies of
letters sent.
Bruce Herbert of
Newground Social Investment tuned in to the meeting and apparently
found it frustrating. I’ll give it a few days to see if anyone else in the
press reports on the virtual-only meeting or maybe Herbert will blog about
it. If not, I’ll give Symantec at least one more post. I urge all readers
and all funds to write to
Ms. Corcos of Symantec protesting the virtual-only meeting. Please cc
USPX. See
this USPX page for sample letters.
In an e-mail to me and
others, Corcos indicated “Symantec received a Low Concern rating on each
of the four categories that RMG evaluates: Board Structure, Compensation,
Shareholder Rights and Audit.” Maybe
RMG also needs to hear from shareowners.
Corcos goes on to say:
“If stockholders preferences change, we will reconsider hybrid models for
future meetings.” I take that to mean, if enough protest they will switch
to a hybrid model. Shareowners should keep bombarding them with letters
and e-mails until they publicly announce next year’s meeting will be a
hybrid one. That will deter other companies from moving to virtual-only
meetings.
Gary Lutin’s
Shareholder Forum has done a great deal to date trying to come to
grips with the various issues through his leadership and that of
Avital Louria Hahn. I anticipate
USPX, which intends to hold additional ongoing forums on the topic,
will build on their work and extend it, developing a broad consensus among
shareowners of best practices.
|
Copyright
© 2004-2010 CorpGov.net |
|