Nouvelles diverses | Page 13

autres publications engagement et activisme actionnarial Gouvernance normes de droit Nouvelles diverses

Hedge fund et activisme : un ouvrage

Ivan Tchotourian 10 janvier 2017

Bonjour à toutes et à tous, je signale cet ouvrage de John C Coffee Jr et Darius Palia sur l’activisme des fonds de couverture : « The Wolf at the Door: The Impact of Hedge Fund Activism on Corporate Governance ». Un bel ouvrage pour compléter une bibliothèque.

The Wolf at the Door: The Impact of Hedge Fund Activism on Corporate Governance has three basic aims: (1) to understand and explain the factors that have caused the recent explosion in hedge fund activism; (2) to examine the impact of this activism, including whether it is shortening investment horizons and discouraging investment in research and development; and (3) to survey and evaluate possible legal interventions with an emphasis on the least restrictive alternative. Although there have been other lengthy surveys, the landscape of activism is rapidly changing and this brings into doubt the relevance of empirical papers that study hedge fund activism in earlier decades. The authors suspect that the recent success of such activism may be fueling a current « hedge fund bubble » under which an increasing number of activist funds are pursuing a decreasing, or at least static, number of companies that have overinvested. This monograph is particularly focused on those markets and the legal forces that may be driving this bubble. After an introduction, Section 2 begins with an analysis of those factors that have spurred greater activism on the part of hedge funds. Section 3 considers evidence suggesting that as the composition of a firm’s shareholder population shift towards more « transient » holders, its investment horizon shortens. Section 4 surveys recent studies to reach assessments about who the targets of hedge fund activism are; the stock price returns from hedge fund activism and the distribution of those returns; the degree to which wealth transfers explain the positive stock price returns to activism; the post-intervention evidence about changes in operating performance of hedge fund targets; and the holding periods and exit strategies of hedge fund activists. Section 5 evaluates some policy options looking for the least drastic means of accomplishing policy goals. Finally, Section 6 offers a brief conclusion that surveys how the changing structure of shareholder ownership and the recent appearance of temporary shareholder majorities complicate corporate governance, both empirically and normatively.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

Nouvelles diverses rémunération

Rémunération des dirigeants canadiens : le rapport alarmant du CCPA

Ivan Tchotourian 3 janvier 2017

Le Centre canadien des politiques alternatives qui a suivi le salaire des PDG du pays sur10 ans affirme que ce groupe aura empoché le salaire moyen annuel d’un Canadien travaillant à temps plein vers 11h47 mardi, le premier jour de travail de l’année pour la majorité des gens.

Selon un rapport intitulé « Throwing Money at the Problem 10 Years of Executive Compensation » :

Despite public outrage over exorbitantly high compensation packages, CEO pay has continued unabated, weathering all kinds of economic storms, and soaring to new highs. This year’s report finds that Canada’s highest paid 100 CEOs have set a new record: their total compensation in 2015 hit a new high at $9.5 million, or 193 times more than someone earning an average wage. They earn the average Canadian wage ($49,510) by 11:47 a.m. on January 3—the first working day of the year.

3 recommandations sont faites :

• One line of attack would be to take compensation decisions out of the hands of the board of directors entirely, by making shareholder votes on pay mandatory rather than advisory.
• A second, less dramatic, change would be to change the accountability of compensation advisors to make them accountable to shareholders rather than to the board, like auditors.
• In the absence of corporate board leadership, it falls to government.

Pour une synthèse, vous pourrez lire l’article suivant sur La presse.ca.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

Gouvernance Nouvelles diverses Valeur actionnariale vs. sociétale

Court-termisme : les propositions de The Aspen Institute

Ivan Tchotourian 2 janvier 2017

The Aspen Institute (par l’intermédiaire de The American Prosperity Project Working Group) vient de publier un rapport proposant de contrer le court-termisme qui gangrène les entreprises américaines. Dans « The American Prosperity Project: Policy Framework », le groupe de travail propose 3 pistes de solutions qui sont les suivantes :

1. Focus government investment on recognized drivers of long-term productivity growth and global competitiveness—namely, infrastructure, basic science research, private R&D, and skills training—in order to close the decades-long investment shortfall in America’s future. Building this foundation will support good jobs and new business formation, support workers affected by globalization and technology, and better position America to address the national debt through long-term economic growth.
2. Unlock business investment by modernizing our corporate tax system to achieve one that is simpler, fair to businesses across the spectrum of size and industry, and supportive of both productivity growth and job creation. Changes to the corporate tax system could reduce the federal corporate statutory tax rate (at 35%, the highest in the world), broaden the base of corporate tax payers, bring off-shore capital back to the US, and reward long-term investment, and help provide revenues to assure that America’s long-term goals can be met.
3. Align public policy and corporate governance protocols to facilitate companies’ and investors’ focus on long-term investment. Complex layers of market pressures, governance regulations, and business norms encourage short-term thinking in business and finance. The goal is a better environment for long-term investing by business leaders and investors, and to provide better outcomes for society.

Pour une synthèse de ce rapport de travail, vous pourrez lire cet excellent article d’Alana Semuels dans The Atlantic « How to Stop Short-Term Thinking at America’s Companies » (30 décembre 2016).

There was a time, half a century ago, when what was good for many American corporations tended to also be good for America. Companies invested in their workers and new technologies, and as a result, they prospered and their employees did too.

Now, a growing group of business leaders is worried that companies are too concerned with short-term profits, focused only on making money for shareholders. As a result, they’re not investing in their workers, in research, or in technology—short-term costs that would reduce profits temporarily. And this, the business leaders say, may be creating long-term problems for the nation.

“Too many CEOs play the quarterly game and manage their businesses accordingly,” Paul Polman, the CEO of the British-Dutch conglomerate Unilever, told me. “But many of the world’s challenges can not be addressed with a quarterly mindset.”

Polman is one of a group of CEOs and business leaders that have signed onto the American Prosperity Project, an initiative spearheaded by the Aspen Institute, to encourage companies and the nation to engage in more long-term thinking. The group, which includes CEOs such as Chip Bergh of Levi Strauss and Ian Read of Pfizer, board directors such as Janet Hill of Wendy’s and Stanley Bergman of Henry Schein, Inc., and labor leaders such as Damon Silvers of the AFL-CIO, have issued a report encouraging the government to make it easier for companies to think in the long-term by investing in infrastructure and changing both the tax code and corporate governance laws.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian