Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A few years ago, when I served as in-house counsel to a major corporation, I asked a representative of one of our largest shareholders how much time she devoted to reviewing our proxy statement ' a document that had occupied a significant portion of my time and on which I had lavished considerable care and attention. “Oh,” she said, “your company represents one of our largest investments, so I spend about 20 minutes on it.” I was shocked, but she was not done. “Of course, when it goes to our proxy committee for a voting decision, I'd say five or 10 minutes max.” Shock turned to dismay; how could all that deathless prose be dismissed in so cavalier a manner?
I'm sure that those responsible for proxy statements at companies throughout the U.S. have had similar rude awakenings. We try to make our disclosures accurate and complete; we often go beyond minimally compliant disclosure to give our owners and the investing public a “feel” for our companies' businesses, how we operate, how our boards and their committees function, and how we compensate our management team. But the facts are that our disclosures are voluminous and getting more so every year (many companies' proxy statements are at or close to 100 pages, and some 10-Ks are in excess of 200 pages) that most investors don't have the time to read, much less digest, these documents and that those who do often find them overwhelming.
In an Oct. 15, 2013 speech, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chair Mary Jo White stated that “ever-increasing amounts of disclosure make it difficult for an investor to wade through the volume of information to ferret out the information that is most relevant.” See The Path Forward on Disclosure.” She could just as easily have added that because of the difficulties involved, many investors don't even try to wade through the information. Retail investors may well give up entirely, but some institutional investors ' including some major investors ' farm out the task of reviewing these disclosures and, indeed, voting the investors' shares, to proxy advisory firms, such as Institutional Shareholder Services and Glass Lewis & Co.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
As consumers continue to shift purchasing and consumption habits in the aftermath of the pandemic, manufacturers are increasingly reliant on third-party logistics and warehousing to ensure their products timely reach the market.
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.