This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
One of the instrumental rights corporate statutes bestow upon shareholders is the appraisal right. This right allows dissenting shareholders of a target company in a corporate control transaction (i.e. mergers and acquisitions) to receive better value for their shares as it is determined by the judiciary. The Saudi Arabian Companies Law of 2015 (CL), nonetheless, did not prescribe such a remedy, nor did any other implementing regulations stipulate this right for shareholders.
Investment manager Russell Investments’ proxy guidelines lay out that the manager will “vote for proposals to restore, or provide shareholders with, rights of appraisal[.]” This, despite the same guidelines setting out a general rule that Russell will vote for mergers themselves if Glass Lewis suggests a “for” vote, except for case by case instances.
Boston Partners, a Massachusetts based investment fund with over $85BB AUM, is in favor of providing appraisal rights – according to its proxy voting policies. While Boston Partners votes on mergers on a “case-by-case” basis, certainly considering numerous elements, it is unequivocal in its support for proposals to restore or provide appraisal rights to shareholders.
Domini Investment Trust is a “women-led SEC registered investment adviser specializing exclusively in impact investing.” Domini’s proxy voting guidelines for 2019 set out that while Domini analyzes mergers on a “case-by-case” basis, it will vote for appraisal rights proposals. As we’ve blogged about before, and will be covering this month, investors’ proxy guidelines often favor appraisal rights, helping confirm the value of these rights to shareholders.
Speaker: Susan Spencer, Principal of Spencer Communications
Intent signal data can go a long way toward shortening sales cycles and closing more deals. The challenge is deciding which is the best type of intent data to help your company meet its sales and marketing goals. In this webinar, Susan Spencer, fractional CMO and principal of Spencer Communications, will unpack the differences between contact-level and company-level intent signals.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 8,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content