November 8, 2016

Shareholder Proposals: Apple Must Include “Hire Multiple Comp Consultants” Proposal

Recently, Corp Fin posted this no-action response to Apple about “engage multiple outside independent experts or resources from the general public to reform its executive compensation principles and practices.” The retail investor proponent – Jing Zhao – appears to have represented himself in rebutting the company’s (i)(3), (i)(6) and (i)(7) arguments. Corp Fin’s response to the ordinary business argument is that “the proposal focuses on senior executive compensation.”

The proponent’s supporting statement cites Professor Thomas Piketty of France, the darling of the income inequality movement. There likely will be more income inequality-oriented proposals in the coming years…

In this no-action letter, Apple also lost its battle to exclude a proxy access shareholder proposal from Jim McRitchie…

Crowdfunding: So Where’s the Crowd?

This blog from Montgomery McCracken’s Ernie Holtzheimer reviews the first five months of crowdfunding under Regulation CF. So far, the results have been underwhelming:

In its first thirty days, Reg CF got off to a promising start with forty companies raising a total of about $2 million. Although the total amount of money raised was not large by Uber’s standards, the number of offerings was more than double the amount of Reg A offerings made between 2009 and 2012. Since the first month, however, only ten more companies have filed a Reg CF offering, leading to the question – where is the crowd?

Reg CF’s critics point to its $1 million funding cap as a reason for this lackluster performance. And some companies seem to be opting to use new Reg A+ – with its much higher funding limits – instead of Reg CF.

Poll: How Many Comp Consultants Should Apple Hire?

Keying off the shareholder proposal mentioned above, please participate in this anonymous poll:


Broc Romanek